Skip to main content

Security report for sensorbis.com

Sensorbis GmbH · Technology · Germany

Critical risk. 12 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

19/100

Risk levelCritical

0–100, higher is better. How it is calculated

Sensorbis GmbH operates a cloud-based telemetry data management platform focused on Internet of Things (IoT) devices and sensors. The company provides subscription services enabling users to acquire, store, visualize, and export telemetry data with real-time charts, maps, and alert notifications. Their target audience includes IoT device operators, industrial machinery managers, and fleet tracking services. The business model centers on SaaS subscriptions with API and web interface management capabilities. The website content is professionally presented with consistent branding and relevant business descriptions, positioning Sensorbis as a niche player in the IoT telemetry cloud market. Technically, the website is built on ASP.NET WebForms with jQuery and Bootstrap, indicating a mature but somewhat dated technology stack. Performance is moderate to slow with a page load time exceeding 5 seconds and a large page size. Mobile optimization and accessibility are basic but functional. The site includes cookie consent mechanisms and privacy policy documentation, though GDPR compliance is not explicitly confirmed. Analytics tracking is present but disabled. From a security perspective, the site suffers from critical issues including the absence of a valid SSL certificate, missing DNS records, and lack of security headers. HTTPS is enforced in the application logic but without a valid certificate, exposing users to risks. No advanced security policies or incident response contacts are published. These vulnerabilities significantly reduce the security posture and trustworthiness of the site. Overall, Sensorbis GmbH presents a credible small technology company with a focused IoT telemetry service offering. However, critical security improvements are necessary to protect user data and enhance trust. Addressing SSL and DNS issues should be prioritized to improve the security score and user confidence.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 100 · Critical
Checks completed
7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

  1. (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
  2. (b) Incident handling: One indicator
  3. (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
  4. (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
  5. (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
  6. (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
  7. (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
  8. (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
  9. (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
  10. (j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside

This scan rated NIS2 with an earlier keyword method that is no longer shown; rescan for the per-article view. Risk management, continuity, supply chain, training, MFA, management oversight (Art. 20) and incident reporting (Art. 23) need internal evidence, and Guard cannot tell whether NIS2 applies to this organisation.

GDPR is indicative only, based on publicly visible signals: Articles 7, 12, 13 and 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive. Not a certification or legal assessment.

Priority findings

12 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

  2. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  3. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: RDP

      Port 3389 (RDP) is publicly accessible - RDP - Remote Desktop, prime ransomware target

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to RDP using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

  4. Security headers

    Security headers are instructions your web server sends to every visitor’s browser. Missing ones leave visitors more exposed to attacks such as clickjacking and injected scripts.

    • High

      Missing Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching sensorbis.com

This scan found 20 issues across 6 checks. Monitoring re-runs those checks daily, emails you when something material changes and records each fix, so you can show progress.

Daily monitoring

Recommended

€25per month

  • TLS certificates and expiry
  • DNS records
  • SPF, DKIM and DMARC
  • Security headers
  • GDPR and NIS2 posture
  • Exposed services
  • Third-party trackers
  • Security score drift

Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.

Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

Full report

€39.90one-time

  • The complete analysis as a PDF you can cite
  • Email delivery with an unlock code
  • Lifetime access to this report

Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.

Results by check

Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.

How this score is calculated

The security score runs 0–100, higher is better. It is the plain average of the security checks that completed in this scan, each counted equally. A check that could not run is left out: it counts neither as a pass nor as a fail.

Counted in this score

SSL/TLS
0
Security headers
15
Email security
50
DNS health
50
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
0
Average
19

Not counted

  • NIS2 outside view: Re-weights evidence from the TLS, email, DNS, network and hygiene checks, so counting it would count that evidence twice. Shown on its own.
  • OffSeq Observations: An AI reading of the site, useful context but not reproducible evidence. Shown on its own.

Findings that cap the score at 49

Each of these is serious on its own, so while any is present the site cannot rate better than high risk, however good the other checks are.

  • The certificate is not trusted by browsers
  • The website is not served over HTTPS
  • A database, remote desktop, file-sharing or Telnet service is reachable from the internet · found on this site
  • The page loads a script from a compromised source
  • The domain registration has expired
  • SPF authorises every server to send mail as the domain

Partial scans

When the site blocks Guard or most checks cannot run, the score covers only the checks that ran (usually DNS and email), is capped at 75 and is shown as partial, without a risk level.

Risk levels

  • Critical0–25
  • High26–49
  • Medium50–75
  • Low76–100

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Sensorbis GmbH targets a specialized market segment in IoT telemetry cloud services, offering a subscription-based SaaS platform with real-time data visualization and alerting. Their competitive advantage lies in ease of use, API integration, and customizable telemetry management. Revenue streams likely derive from tiered subscriptions with configurable data retention and user limits. The company appears to focus on small to medium enterprises and industrial clients requiring telemetry monitoring. The partnership with sensorbis.cloud as the main service platform indicates a focused ecosystem. Growth potential exists in expanding IoT adoption and telemetry analytics. However, the lack of visible contact information and limited marketing tools may constrain broader market penetration. Strategic partnerships and enhanced digital marketing could improve visibility and customer acquisition.

Security posture

The current security maturity level of Sensorbis GmbH's website is low due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate, missing DNS records, and lack of security headers. These issues expose the platform to man-in-the-middle attacks, domain resolution failures, and potential content injection risks. The presence of HTTPS in application logic and cookie consent mechanisms shows some awareness of security and privacy best practices. However, the lack of documented security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure processes indicates gaps in compliance and readiness. The minimal use of analytics and no visible tracking reduce privacy risks but also limit user behavior insights. Overall, the security posture requires urgent remediation of SSL and DNS configurations, implementation of security headers, and publication of security policies to align with GDPR and industry standards.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate immediately to secure all HTTPS connections and protect user data.
  2. Configure proper DNS records (A, AAAA, MX, NS, TXT) to ensure domain resolution, email functionality, and domain reputation.
  3. Implement security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to mitigate common web attacks.
  4. Enable HSTS to enforce HTTPS usage and improve transport layer security.
  5. Publish comprehensive security and incident response policies including contact channels for vulnerability reporting.
  6. Enhance privacy compliance by explicitly stating GDPR adherence and data retention policies in privacy documentation.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on an older ASP.NET WebForms framework with jQuery 2.2.4 and Bootstrap for UI styling. While functional, this stack may limit modernization and responsiveness. Performance is suboptimal with a 5-second load time and a large page size (~700KB), suggesting opportunities for optimization such as resource minification and lazy loading. Mobile optimization is basic but present. SEO is supported by meta tags and Open Graph data but could be improved with structured data and sitemap integration. The absence of a CMS indicates a custom or legacy deployment. No hosting provider information is available, and DNS misconfiguration may impact availability. Technical debt is evident in outdated libraries and missing security configurations, posing risks to business continuity and user experience.
Standards and sources

Reference chips under each finding point to the standard, regulation or specification the finding relates to. They are taken from the official datasets below and mapped conservatively: a finding with no defensible link shows none. NIS2 and GDPR references mark where a finding is relevant evidence, not a compliance verdict. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 binds digital infrastructure and digital service providers; for other entities it is the most detailed public reading of the Article 21 measures. WCAG, EN 301 549, European Accessibility Act and Web Accessibility Directive references name the requirement an automated accessibility rule relates to; they are not a conformance verdict.

Retrieved 2026-10-25

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with sensorbis.com. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.

Overall rating
Select a rating
4000 characters remaining

We’ll email you to confirm your review and keep your details private.

Community rating

No published reviews yet. Be the first to review sensorbis.com.

Feedback on this report

Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.

Overall report quality
Select a rating
2000 characters remaining

We only use your feedback to improve Guard reports. Contact details are never shared.