Skip to main content

Security report for stagrp.com

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

70/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website www.stagrp.com appears to be a minimal Wix-built site with very limited content and no visible business or contact information. The absence of privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies, combined with no contact emails or phone numbers, suggests a lack of transparency and professionalism. The WHOIS lookup failed to return any registration data, indicating the domain may be unregistered or privacy protected without justification, which raises concerns about legitimacy. Technically, the site uses Wix platform technologies and basic JavaScript but lacks advanced frameworks or security headers. Performance and mobile optimization are basic but functional. Security posture is weak due to missing security headers and policies. Overall, the site presents a low trust profile and minimal business credibility.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
58/ 100 · Medium
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. 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 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';…

  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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

  3. 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 Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

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

Keep watching stagrp.com

This scan found 23 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
72
Security headers
35
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
58
Average
70

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

Due to the lack of business information, no clear market positioning, business model, or target audience can be identified. The site does not disclose company name, sector, or services. There are no visible partnerships or certifications. The absence of contact details and policies further limits business intelligence insights. The domain's unregistered or privacy-protected status without clear justification is a negative indicator. The site likely represents a small or inactive business presence with no evident growth or market engagement.

Security posture

The security posture of the website is weak. There are no detected security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or Strict-Transport-Security. The SSL configuration is basic but present. No security or incident response policies are published, and no contact channels for security issues are provided. The site does not appear to use any advanced security frameworks or certifications. The lack of privacy and cookie policies indicates non-compliance with GDPR and other data protection regulations. Overall, the site is vulnerable to trust and compliance issues and lacks a mature security culture.

Recommendations

  1. Register the domain properly and ensure WHOIS data is accurate and transparent to improve legitimacy.
  2. Publish comprehensive privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies to comply with legal requirements and build user trust.
  3. Add clear contact information including company emails, phone numbers, and physical addresses.
  4. Implement security headers and improve SSL/TLS configuration to enhance security posture.
  5. Establish and publish incident response and security policies with dedicated contact channels.
  6. Improve website content quality, design, and navigation to enhance user experience and professionalism.
  7. Consider integrating analytics and marketing tools with privacy compliance to better understand and engage visitors.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Stack
Wix, JavaScript
Platforms
Wix.com
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

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. Website is built on Wix platform with minimal content and no visible business or contact information.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the site.
  3. No contact emails, phone numbers, or social media links detected.
  4. No security or incident response policies are published.
  5. WHOIS data is unavailable, indicating possible unregistered domain or privacy protection.
  6. Website lacks trust signals and professional business information.
  7. No analytics or advertising scripts detected.
  8. Site performance and mobile optimization are basic but functional.
  9. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is hosted on Wix platform using Wix's JavaScript libraries and static media hosting. The site loads multiple CSS and JS bundles from Wix's CDN infrastructure. Performance is moderate with basic mobile optimization. Accessibility features are minimal. SEO optimization is basic with limited meta tags and no structured data detected. No advanced frameworks or server-side technologies are evident. The site lacks security headers and advanced security configurations. There is no evidence of analytics or tracking scripts. Overall, the technical implementation is basic and could benefit from modernization and security hardening.
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 stagrp.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 stagrp.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.