Skip to main content

Security report for soitrongroup.com

Soitron Group · Technology · Slovakia

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in Email security and SSL/TLS.

Security score

76/100

Risk levelLow

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

Soitron Group is a well-established IT services and solutions provider with a strong regional presence across Central and Eastern Europe and Turkey. The company offers key services including cybersecurity, hyperautomation (RPA), and IT outsourcing, supported by a network of subsidiaries and partners. Their website reflects a professional and consistent brand image, supported by multiple ISO certifications and technology partnerships with industry leaders such as Cisco, IBM, Microsoft, and Palo Alto Networks. The availability of annual reports and comprehensive contact information further reinforces their business credibility. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with modern plugins and tracking tools such as Google Tag Manager, Microsoft Clarity, and Facebook Pixel. The site is mobile optimized and SEO friendly, though performance is moderate. Security measures include HTTPS, reCAPTCHA on forms, and cookie consent mechanisms, but there is room for improvement in security headers and explicit incident response policies. The security posture is solid with no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data, and privacy compliance is well addressed with GDPR-aligned policies. However, the WHOIS data is missing or unavailable, which raises concerns about domain registration legitimacy. Despite this, the overall risk is mitigated by the professional content and business presence. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security headers, publishing a Terms of Service page, establishing clear incident response and vulnerability disclosure policies, and improving accessibility features. These steps will strengthen trust and compliance while supporting the company’s growth and digital maturity.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 100 · Low
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

3 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

    • High

      No SPF record found

      SPF helps prevent email spoofing

      What to do: Add SPF record: "v=spf1 include:_spf.yourmailprovider.com ~all"

  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.

    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching soitrongroup.com

This scan found 18 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
65
Security headers
90
Email security
40
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
76

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

Soitron Group operates as a large technology entity focused on delivering complex IT services and solutions. Their business model revolves around regional subsidiaries providing tailored IT outsourcing, cybersecurity, and automation services to enterprise clients. The company leverages strong partnerships with global technology vendors to enhance its service offerings. Revenue streams likely include managed services, consulting, and software integration. The target customers are businesses requiring advanced IT infrastructure and security solutions. The presence of annual reports indicates transparency and growth tracking. The partnership ecosystem and certifications position Soitron competitively in the Central and Eastern European IT market, with expansion into Turkey and the UK. The company’s strategic focus on cybersecurity and hyperautomation aligns with current market trends, supporting sustainable growth.

Security posture

Soitron Group demonstrates a mature security posture with HTTPS enforced, use of reCAPTCHA to protect forms, and cookie consent mechanisms ensuring privacy compliance. The website does not expose sensitive information or use vulnerable libraries visibly. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options suggests room for improvement. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is publicly available, which could hinder rapid response to security events. The company holds multiple ISO certifications related to information security and quality management, indicating internal adherence to security frameworks. Overall, the security culture appears strong but would benefit from enhanced transparency and technical hardening on the web presence.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  2. Publish a clear Terms of Service page to improve legal transparency.
  3. Establish and publicize an incident response and vulnerability disclosure policy with dedicated contact channels.
  4. Enhance website accessibility features to meet WCAG standards.
  5. Verify and update WHOIS domain registration information to improve trust and legitimacy.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
SOITRON, s.r.o.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Soitron Group
Description
We are a group of experienced IT professionals who are passionate about what we do. Read more about our professional services and solutions.
Key services
Cybersecurity, Hyperautomation (RPA), IT Outsourcing
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Yoast SEO plugin, Google Tag Manager, Microsoft Clarity, Facebook Pixel, Google reCAPTCHA v2 and v3, jQuery, WOW.js, Slick Carousel
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Use of reCAPTCHA for forms
  • Consent management for cookies
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Microsoft Clarity, Google Analytics (via GTM), Facebook Pixel
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Ads
Tracking pixels
Microsoft Clarity, Facebook Pixel, Google Analytics (via GTM)
Marketing tools
Facebook Pixel, Microsoft Clarity
Transparency
good

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 multiple sections.
  2. Strong regional presence with multiple subsidiaries and offices.
  3. Good use of modern web technologies and analytics tools.
  4. Comprehensive contact information and professional branding.
  5. WHOIS data missing, which is a concern for domain legitimacy.
  6. No explicit Terms of Service page found.
  7. Privacy and cookie policies are present and GDPR compliant.
  8. Security headers and policies could be improved.
  9. No evidence of adult or questionable content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with a modern tech stack including jQuery, WOW.js for animations, Slick Carousel for sliders, and Yoast SEO for search optimization. It integrates multiple analytics and marketing tools such as Google Tag Manager, Microsoft Clarity, and Facebook Pixel, enabling detailed user behavior tracking and marketing effectiveness. The site uses asynchronous loading for scripts and preconnect hints to optimize performance, though overall loading speed is moderate. Mobile optimization is good with responsive design elements. The site employs reCAPTCHA v2 and v3 for spam protection on forms. There is no explicit hosting provider identified from the data. The technical implementation is solid but could benefit from enhanced security configurations and accessibility improvements.
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 soitrongroup.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 soitrongroup.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.