Skip to main content

Security report for studiolegale.sm

Beccari Podeschi · Transportation · San Marino

Partial score · DNS & email only

37/100

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

Beccari Podeschi is a small, specialized law firm based in San Marino with an additional office in Switzerland. The firm focuses on providing high-quality legal representation, particularly in the aviation and transport sectors, offering services such as aircraft financing, corporate law, and notarial services. The website is built on the Wix platform and demonstrates a professional design with clear navigation and relevant content for its target audience. However, the technical implementation shows some weaknesses, including slow performance and basic mobile optimization. Security posture is a concern due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and lack of modern TLS protocols, which exposes visitors to potential risks. Privacy compliance is minimal, with no visible privacy or cookie policies, indicating a gap in regulatory adherence. Overall, the website reflects a credible business but requires significant improvements in security and privacy to enhance trust and compliance.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of studiolegale.sm. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
30/ 100 · High
Checks completed
6of 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

      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 Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

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

  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. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • High

      High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

      Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

      What to do: Consider restricting access to FTP or implementing strong authentication

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

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

Keep watching studiolegale.sm

This scan found 9 issues across 5 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
50
DNS health
85
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
30
Average
37

Not counted

  • Security headers: 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

The firm positions itself as a niche legal service provider with expertise in aviation law, serving both national and international clients. Its business model revolves around specialized legal advice and notarial services, targeting clients in the transport sector including banks, lessors, airlines, and high-net-worth individuals. The presence of published legal documents and participation in sector conferences indicates active engagement in the industry. The firm’s market position is that of a specialized, small-sized entity with a focused service offering. The website’s content and structure support this positioning, although the lack of comprehensive privacy and security policies may affect client confidence. The firm appears to maintain a professional brand with consistent messaging and trust indicators such as detailed team profiles and downloadable legal resources.

Security posture

The current security posture of the website is basic and insufficient for a professional legal services provider. The absence of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols are critical vulnerabilities that undermine data confidentiality and integrity. While some security headers like HSTS and X-Content-Type-Options are present, the lack of OCSP stapling, session resumption, and other modern security features reduces overall protection. No explicit security or incident response policies are published, which may indicate limited preparedness for handling security incidents. The website uses secure cookies with HttpOnly and SameSite attributes, which is a positive practice. However, the critical lack of HTTPS significantly lowers the security score and poses a risk to users and the business.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS and secure all communications.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 or 1.3) and configure OCSP stapling and session resumption.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and other regulations.
  4. Develop and disclose security and incident response policies to enhance trust and preparedness.
  5. Conduct regular security audits and update third-party libraries to mitigate vulnerabilities.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using the Wix platform, leveraging Wix Thunderbolt and React technologies. It uses standard web technologies including HTML5, CSS, and JavaScript. The site includes multiple external resources hosted on Wix’s CDN and related domains. Performance is slow, likely due to large media files and platform overhead. Mobile optimization is basic, with some responsive design elements but not fully optimized for all devices. Accessibility features are minimal but present. SEO optimization is basic with meta tags and Open Graph data but lacks advanced SEO practices. The site uses modern JavaScript libraries and frameworks but lacks advanced performance tuning.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 35/100High25 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with studiolegale.sm. 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 studiolegale.sm.

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.