Skip to main content

Security report for spring-gds.com

Spring GDS · Transportation · Netherlands

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

Security score

48/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Spring GDS is an established international delivery company specializing in cross-border e-commerce shipping solutions since 2001. Positioned as part of the PostNL group, it offers a comprehensive suite of services including global shipping, returns, customs clearance, and integrations tailored for online businesses. The company emphasizes sustainability and holds an EcoVadis certification, reinforcing its commitment to environmental responsibility. The website targets businesses seeking efficient international logistics with a focus on last-mile delivery expertise. Technically, the website employs modern web technologies such as Google Tag Manager and Sentry for analytics and error monitoring, and is hosted behind Akamai CDN. However, performance is impacted by slow DNS resolution and the absence of a valid SSL certificate, which critically undermines the security posture. The site is mobile-optimized with excellent design and navigation, supporting a positive user experience. Security analysis reveals significant weaknesses: no valid SSL/TLS certificate is deployed, no TLS protocols are enabled, and critical security features like OCSP stapling and session resumption are missing. While security headers are present, the lack of HTTPS severely limits the site's trustworthiness and exposes users to risks. Privacy compliance is good with clear policies and GDPR adherence, but incident response and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are not publicly documented. Overall, Spring GDS presents a credible and professional business with strong market positioning and comprehensive service offerings. The primary risk lies in its deficient SSL configuration, which should be urgently addressed to protect customer data and maintain trust. Strategic improvements in security infrastructure will enhance the company’s digital maturity and safeguard its reputation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 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

    • 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

  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 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 spring-gds.com

This scan found 16 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
55
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
Average
48

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 spring-gds.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
127
Employees
0
Customers
106
Third parties
21
Weak passwords
6%

3 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 spring-gds.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

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

Spring GDS operates in the transportation and e-commerce sectors, leveraging its affiliation with PostNL to access a robust last-mile delivery network. Its business model focuses on providing integrated shipping solutions for online retailers, including delivery, returns, customs clearance, and platform integrations. The company targets medium to large e-commerce businesses seeking international expansion. Its sustainability initiatives and EcoVadis certification differentiate it competitively. The website content and structure indicate a mature digital presence with multilingual support and detailed service descriptions. Partnerships with major platforms and a strong social media footprint support growth and customer engagement. The company’s longevity since 2001 and consistent branding reinforce market credibility.

Security posture

The current security posture of Spring GDS is weak due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols, exposing the site to potential interception and man-in-the-middle attacks. While security headers such as X-Frame-Options and X-Content-Type-Options are implemented, the lack of HTTPS is a critical vulnerability. No evidence of advanced security frameworks or incident response policies is found. The site uses secure cookies with SameSite=Strict and Secure flags, which is positive. No known vulnerabilities like Heartbleed or POODLE are detected, but the overall SSL/TLS configuration is inadequate. Privacy policies are comprehensive and GDPR compliant, but the lack of a security.txt or vulnerability disclosure page limits transparency. Immediate remediation of SSL/TLS issues is essential to improve security maturity.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3) and disable deprecated protocols.
  3. Implement HSTS with includeSubDomains and preload flags to enforce secure connections.
  4. Establish and publish an incident response policy and vulnerability disclosure program.
  5. Enhance performance by optimizing DNS resolution and resource loading times.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Spring GDS
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with modern front-end technologies including custom fonts (Outfit, Mulish), JavaScript bundles, and uses Google Tag Manager and Sentry for analytics and error tracking. Hosting is via Akamai CDN, providing global content delivery. The site is mobile responsive with good SEO metadata and structured data (JSON-LD) for organization and contact information. However, the absence of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols represent significant technical debt and security risk. Performance metrics indicate slow DNS resolution and no measured page load time, suggesting room for optimization. Accessibility features are basic but present. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a professional web presence but requires urgent security upgrades.
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 spring-gds.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 spring-gds.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.