Skip to main content

Security report for servicedesk.net

Requestor.com s.r.o. · Technology · Czech Republic

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

52/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Requestor.com s.r.o. is a technology company specializing in advanced helpdesk and ticket management solutions for customer service and internal operations. Their offerings include a cloud-based platform and an on-premises server version, both featuring integrated AI to enhance service delivery. The company targets businesses seeking efficient communication consolidation and ticketing systems. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with modern JavaScript libraries and frameworks, providing a responsive and user-friendly experience. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and no exposed sensitive data, though the absence of security headers and explicit privacy policies indicates room for improvement. The lack of WHOIS data for the domain raises concerns about domain registration transparency, impacting trustworthiness. Overall, the website is professional and functional but would benefit from enhanced compliance and security disclosures.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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

8 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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
    • High

      Missing X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

    • High

      Missing Content-Security-Policy header

      Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

      What to do: Implement a Content-Security-Policy appropriate for your application

      • ASVS V3.4.3
      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Content-Security-Policy: default-src 'self'; form-action 'self'; base-uri 'self'; object-src 'none';…

  2. GDPR outside view

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

    • High

      No Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

    • High

      No Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

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

Keep watching servicedesk.net

This scan found 25 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. See sample alerts.

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
95
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
35
Average
52

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
  • 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

Requestor.com operates in the niche market of helpdesk software with AI integration, positioning itself as a flexible provider with cloud and on-premises deployment options. Their business model likely includes SaaS subscriptions and licensing fees. The presence of notable customers and testimonials suggests a growing client base. The company leverages partnerships for support services (e.g., servicedesk.net). However, the missing WHOIS data and lack of visible contact details may hinder trust for new customers. Marketing efforts include newsletter subscriptions and social media engagement. The company appears focused on continuous product updates and integration capabilities, indicating a strategy of innovation and customer-centric development.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses Google Tag Manager for controlled script loading, which is positive. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options reduces defense-in-depth. No explicit security policies, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure programs are published, which limits transparency and preparedness. Cookie consent is implemented, indicating some privacy compliance awareness. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. Overall, the security maturity is moderate but could be significantly improved by adopting best practices and publishing relevant policies.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Add security headers like Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Provide clear contact information including emails and phone numbers for sales, support, and security incident reporting.
  4. Establish and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  5. Investigate and resolve the missing WHOIS data issue to improve domain registration transparency and legitimacy.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Requestor.com s.r.o.
Description
Requestor.com s.r.o. offers an advanced helpdesk solution for customer service and internal ticket management, featuring an integrated AI system. They provide two main product versions: a cloud-based solution and an on-premises server version, both designed to consolidate communication channels and improve service efficiency.
Key services
Helpdesk ticketing system, AI integration for service automation, Cloud and on-premises deployment, Third-party system integrations
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Google Tag Manager, WordPress, Easy Fancybox, Mailchimp
Frameworks
Foundation CSS
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of Google Tag Manager for controlled script loading

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Marketing tools
Mailchimp, CookieYes
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and navigation
  2. No visible privacy or terms of service pages found
  3. Cookie consent banner present and active
  4. No direct contact emails or phone numbers visible on homepage
  5. Use of modern web technologies and CMS
  6. Customer logos and testimonials enhance trust
  7. WHOIS data missing, which is a concern for domain legitimacy
  8. No explicit security policies or incident response info published
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses WordPress CMS with Foundation CSS framework and jQuery libraries, ensuring a modern and responsive design. Google Tag Manager is used for analytics and marketing scripts, and Mailchimp handles newsletter subscriptions. The site loads scripts asynchronously and defers non-critical JavaScript, aiding performance. Accessibility is basic but functional. SEO is supported with proper meta tags and canonical links. Hosting provider details are not explicit. The site performs moderately well but could benefit from enhanced accessibility features and performance optimizations such as image compression and caching strategies.
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 servicedesk.net. 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 servicedesk.net.

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.