Skip to main content

Security report for sol.fi

SOL Suomi · Real Estate · Finland

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view.

Security score

71/100

Risk levelMedium

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

SOL Suomi is a well-established Finnish family-owned service company with over 30 years of experience, providing a broad range of services including cleaning, facility management, personnel leasing, logistics outsourcing, technical services, security, and laundry services. The company serves businesses and municipalities primarily in Finland and positions itself as a sustainability leader with a large workforce of approximately 13,500 employees. The website reflects a professional and comprehensive digital presence with clear branding and detailed service information. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern technologies such as Google Tag Manager and CookieHub for privacy compliance. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforced and no visible vulnerabilities, though formal security policies and incident response contacts are not published. Overall, the site demonstrates high professionalism, trustworthiness, and compliance with GDPR.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
10/ 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

5 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

    • 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

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

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

Keep watching sol.fi

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
85
Security headers
80
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
10
Average
71

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention sol.fi, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
9
Employees
3
Customers
2
Third parties
4
Weak passwords
44%

Latest record dated 2025-08-25 · 2 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for sol.fi.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • –mail.sol.fi2025-08-25
  • –mail.sol.fi2025-07-22
  • –mail.sol.fi2025-07-20

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

SOL Suomi operates in the real estate and service sectors, targeting corporate and municipal clients requiring outsourced facility and personnel services. Its business model focuses on comprehensive service offerings across multiple domains, leveraging a large workforce and regional partnerships in Nordic and Baltic countries. The company emphasizes sustainability and responsibility, supported by certifications like the Nordic Swan Ecolabel. The website's content and structure indicate a mature organization with a strong market position and a clear growth strategy through regional partnerships. The presence of multiple service lines and detailed job postings suggests active recruitment and expansion efforts.

Security posture

The website exhibits a mature security posture with HTTPS enabled and no exposed sensitive data. Use of Google Tag Manager and CookieHub indicates controlled script management and privacy compliance. However, the absence of a published security policy, incident response information, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms represents gaps in transparency and readiness. Security headers are not explicitly detected in the HTML content, suggesting room for improvement. Overall, the security posture is good but could be enhanced by formalizing policies and improving header configurations.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a formal security policy and incident response plan on the website to enhance transparency and preparedness.
  2. Implement and expose a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  3. Enhance HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  4. Regularly audit third-party scripts and plugins for vulnerabilities and update them promptly.
  5. Continue to maintain and communicate GDPR compliance and data protection practices to build user trust.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
SOL Suomi Yhtiöt
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
SOL Suomi
Description
SOL – yli 30 vuotta aurinkoista palvelua monella alueella pesulapalveluista turvallisuuspalveluihin.
Key services
Siivouspalvelut (Cleaning services), Toimitilapalvelut (Facility services), Henkilöstöpalvelut (Personnel services), Logistiikan ulkoistuspalvelut (Logistics outsourcing), Kiinteistöhuollon palvelut (Property maintenance), Talotekniikkapalvelut (Technical services), Turvallisuuspalvelut (Security services), Pesulapalvelut (Laundry services)
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, jQuery, Google Tag Manager, CookieHub
Frameworks
The SEO Framework (WordPress SEO plugin)
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
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
good

Advertising

Marketing tools
CookieHub
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and clear navigation.
  2. Strong presence of corporate branding and trust signals.
  3. Comprehensive service offerings detailed with dedicated pages.
  4. Use of modern web technologies and compliance with privacy regulations.
  5. No critical security issues or vulnerabilities detected in the content.
  6. Social media integration supports engagement and transparency.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS using modern JavaScript libraries including jQuery and Google Tag Manager for analytics and tag management. CookieHub is used for cookie consent management, indicating compliance with privacy regulations. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and accessibility features such as skip links for screen readers. Performance is moderate with deferred script loading and optimized images. SEO is supported by The SEO Framework plugin and structured data in JSON-LD format. Hosting provider details are not explicitly found. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid with opportunities to improve security headers and performance optimizations.
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 sol.fi. 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 sol.fi.

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.