Skip to main content

Security report for sks365.com

SKS365 · Other · Italy

High risk. 7 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

35/100

Risk levelHigh

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

SKS365 is a medium-sized, Italy-based omnichannel sports betting and gaming operator, positioned as a leading player in the Italian market. The company offers a broad range of betting and gaming services including sports betting, virtual sports, and online casino games. The website reflects a professional corporate presence with consistent branding and a focus on compliance and responsible gaming. Technically, the site is built on WordPress and hosted on Microsoft Azure, utilizing common web technologies such as jQuery and Google Tag Manager. However, the site lacks a valid SSL certificate, which severely impacts its security posture and user trust. Privacy compliance is partially addressed with a comprehensive privacy policy, but cookie consent mechanisms are missing. No direct contact information such as emails or phone numbers are visible, which may affect user engagement and trust. Overall, the site is functional but requires significant security improvements to meet modern standards.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
18/ 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

7 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. 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';…

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

Keep watching sks365.com

This scan found 19 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
85
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
18
Average
35

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

The company operates primarily in the Italian sports betting and gaming sector, leveraging both online and retail channels. It is part of the Lottomatica Group, a well-known entity in the gaming industry, which enhances its market credibility. The business model focuses on delivering a wide variety of betting options and gaming experiences to a large customer base. The presence of downloadable compliance documents and active social media channels indicates a mature approach to corporate governance and customer engagement. The lack of visible direct contact details and absence of cookie consent mechanisms suggest areas for improvement in customer support and regulatory compliance. The company appears to be growing, with recent acquisitions and expansions noted in press releases.

Security posture

The website's security posture is weak due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate, resulting in no HTTPS support. This exposes users to potential data interception risks and undermines trust. Additionally, the site lacks critical security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options, which are essential for mitigating common web attacks. No evidence of vulnerability disclosure or incident response policies is present, indicating limited transparency in security management. The SPF DNS record is well configured, suggesting good email security practices. Overall, the site requires urgent remediation of SSL/TLS issues and enhancement of security headers to improve its defense against threats and comply with best practices.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Implement HTTP security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection.
  3. Introduce a cookie policy and consent mechanism to comply with GDPR and enhance privacy transparency.
  4. Publish clear contact information including security incident response contacts and data protection officer details.
  5. Establish and publicize a vulnerability disclosure policy and incident response procedures to build trust.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 6.8.1 with a custom theme and uses common JavaScript libraries such as jQuery and Slick Carousel for UI components. Google Tag Manager is integrated for analytics and marketing. Hosting is on Microsoft Azure, indicated by the IP address and DNS records. Performance metrics are not available, but the site includes responsive design elements and mobile optimization appears good. SEO is supported by Yoast SEO plugin with proper meta tags and structured data in JSON-LD format. However, the lack of HTTPS and security headers represents a significant technical risk. The site uses external resources from trusted domains like Google Fonts and FontAwesome. Overall, the technical stack is modern but security implementation is incomplete.
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 sks365.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 sks365.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.