Skip to main content

Security report for solihullflooring.co.uk

Other · N/a

Partial score · DNS & email only

28/100

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

The analyzed content corresponds to a Chrome internal error page (chrome-error://chromewebdata/) typically displayed when the browser cannot load the requested website. No actual website content, business information, or metadata is present. The page includes only the Chrome offline dinosaur game scripts and styles, indicating no external website is accessible at this URL. Consequently, no business or security policies, contact information, or analytics are available for assessment. The technical infrastructure is limited to browser internal resources with no hosting or CMS details. Security posture is minimal due to the absence of real content and security headers. Overall, the site is inaccessible, and no meaningful analysis of business credibility or compliance can be performed.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 100 · Critical
Checks completed
5of 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

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

    • 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

  2. DNS health

    DNS sends visitors and email to the right servers. Misconfigured records can cause outages or let someone redirect your traffic.

    • Critical

      DNS Resolution Failed

      Unable to resolve domain A records

      What to do: Verify domain is properly configured and not expired

  3. 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

  4. 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

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

Keep watching solihullflooring.co.uk

This scan found 15 issues across 4 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
Email security
60
DNS health
25
GDPR outside view
25
Average
28

Not counted

  • Security headers: did not complete in this scan.
  • Network security: did not complete in this scan.
  • 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

No business intelligence can be derived as the content is an internal browser error page with no company or service information. There are no indications of market positioning, business model, or partnerships. The domain and WHOIS data are not provided, preventing any domain legitimacy assessment.

Security posture

The security posture is inherently minimal since the page is a browser-generated error page with no external hosting or server configuration. No HTTPS or security headers are applicable. No vulnerabilities or incident response mechanisms are present. The page does not expose any sensitive data or forms.

Recommendations

  1. Ensure the actual website is accessible and properly hosted with valid SSL/TLS certificates.
  2. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with regulations.
  3. Provide clear contact and business information to enhance credibility.
  4. Add security headers and perform regular security assessments on the live website.
  5. Avoid exposing internal error pages to end users; implement user-friendly error handling.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

None detected. Content is a Chrome internal error page (chrome-error://chromewebdata/) indicating no external website content is accessible. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, HTML5, CSS3, Canvas API
Platforms
Chrome browser offline error page
Performance
fast
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
30/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. The content is a Chrome internal error page indicating the requested website is not accessible.
  2. No actual website content is present; only the Chrome offline dinosaur game scripts and styles are included.
  3. No business, contact, or policy information is available.
  4. No external links, forms, or metadata related to a real website are found.
  5. The page is not a WAF or security challenge but an internal browser error page.
  6. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies detected.
  7. No security policies or incident response information found.
  8. No analytics, advertising, or tracking technologies detected.
  9. No WHOIS data provided to analyze domain registration or legitimacy.
Technical notes

Notes

The technical content is limited to Chromium's offline dinosaur game scripts and styles embedded in the error page. No CMS, hosting provider, or external technologies are detected. The page is optimized for mobile and includes accessibility features typical of Chrome's offline page. Performance is fast due to minimal content. No SEO optimization or metadata is 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 solihullflooring.co.uk. 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 solihullflooring.co.uk.

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.