Skip to main content

Security report for servicesconsulting.it

Other · N/a

High risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

41/100

Risk levelHigh

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

The website servicesconsulting.it currently serves as a parked domain with minimal content primarily focused on advertising via Google Adsense and Bodis. There is no substantive business description, contact information, or service offerings presented, indicating the site is not actively used for commercial or consulting purposes. The technical infrastructure is basic, relying on standard HTML, CSS, and JavaScript with embedded advertising scripts. Security posture is weak, with no HTTPS detected and absence of security headers or policies. Privacy compliance is minimal, with only basic privacy and legal pages present but lacking cookie consent mechanisms. Overall, the site presents a low trust profile with limited business credibility and poor user experience.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
3/ 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

8 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

      EU business without adequate privacy measures

      EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

      What to do: Implement comprehensive GDPR compliance including privacy policy, cookie consent, and data protection measures

    • 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. 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"

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

Keep watching servicesconsulting.it

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. 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
0
Security headers
20
Email security
50
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
3
Average
41

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

Due to the lack of meaningful content and business information, the site does not demonstrate a clear market position or business model. The presence of advertising scripts suggests monetization through domain parking rather than active consulting services. No partnerships, certifications, or growth indicators are evident. The domain is privacy protected, which is common for parked domains but reduces transparency. There is no evidence of a target audience or sector focus.

Security posture

The security maturity of the website is low. The absence of HTTPS and security headers exposes users to potential risks. No incident response or security policies are published, and no contact channels for security issues are provided. The site does not implement cookie consent or GDPR compliance mechanisms, which is a compliance gap. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected, but the overall security hygiene is poor.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate to secure user connections.
  2. Add comprehensive privacy and cookie consent policies to comply with GDPR.
  3. Publish clear contact information and business details to improve trust.
  4. Introduce security headers and a security policy page to enhance security posture.
  5. Develop meaningful content and remove parking ads to improve user experience and credibility.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
The website appears to be a placeholder or parked domain with no substantive business description or content.
Content quality
poor
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, Google Adsense, Google Ad Services
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
40/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Adsense, Bodis
Tracking pixels
Google Ad Services
Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
basic
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website content is minimal and appears to be a parked domain with advertising.
  2. No meaningful business or contact information is provided.
  3. No forms or data collection mechanisms detected.
  4. No security policies or incident response information available.
  5. Advertising is present via Google Adsense and Bodis.
  6. No HTTPS detected in provided data; security headers not visible.
  7. No social media or external business-related links found.
  8. Privacy and cookie policies exist but are basic and lack consent mechanisms.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses basic web technologies without any modern frameworks or CMS detected. Advertising scripts from Google and Bodis dominate the page, indicating a monetization strategy based on parking. Performance is moderate but could be improved by removing unnecessary scripts and optimizing content. Mobile optimization and accessibility are basic, with minimal effort to enhance user experience. SEO is minimal with only basic meta tags present.
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 servicesconsulting.it. 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 servicesconsulting.it.

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.