Skip to main content

Security report for studiorbb.com

Studio RBB · Other · Denmark

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

50/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Studio RBB is a small creative or digital studio likely focused on multimedia or design services, as inferred from the website's use of Flash content and branding. The company has been established since 2010 and is registered through a reputable registrar in Denmark. The website content is minimal, relying heavily on deprecated Flash technology, which negatively impacts accessibility, security, and user experience. There is no visible privacy, cookie, or terms of service policy, nor any contact information or social media links with valid URLs, limiting transparency and user trust. From a technical perspective, the website uses outdated Flash technology embedded via JavaScript, with no modern frameworks or CMS detected. Hosting appears to be provided by Datucentrs based on nameservers. The site lacks mobile optimization, accessibility features, SEO best practices, and security headers. DNSSEC is not enabled, and HTTPS enforcement cannot be confirmed from the provided data. Security posture is weak due to the use of Flash, absence of security headers, and lack of visible HTTPS enforcement. No incident response or security policies are found. The domain WHOIS data is consistent and trustworthy, with a long registration history and no privacy protection, supporting legitimacy. However, the website itself lacks critical security and privacy compliance features. Overall, the website presents a low trustworthiness and professionalism level, with significant technical debt and security risks. Strategic recommendations include migrating away from Flash to modern web technologies, implementing security headers and HTTPS, adding privacy and cookie policies, and improving contact transparency to enhance user trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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

8 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 Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1
    • 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 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

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

Keep watching studiorbb.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
57
Security headers
15
Email security
85
DNS health
75
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
50
Average
50

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 studiorbb.com, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for studiorbb.com right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

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

Studio RBB operates as a small creative digital studio, likely serving clients needing multimedia or design services. The business model appears service-oriented with a focus on digital content creation. Market positioning and competitive advantages are unclear due to limited public information. The company targets clients requiring creative digital solutions, but the website's outdated technology and minimal content limit effective marketing and client engagement. No partnerships or subsidiaries are identified. The domain's long registration history suggests business stability, but the lack of modern web presence may hinder growth and competitiveness.

Security posture

The current security maturity level is low. The website uses deprecated Flash technology, which is known for security vulnerabilities. No security headers or HTTPS enforcement are evident, increasing exposure to common web attacks. There are no visible privacy or security policies, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms. DNSSEC is not enabled, reducing DNS security. The absence of contact information and security frameworks indicates limited security culture and readiness. Compliance with GDPR or other data protection regulations is not demonstrated. The business faces risks from outdated technology and lack of security best practices, which could impact reputation and client trust.

Recommendations

  1. Migrate website from Flash to modern HTML5 and JavaScript frameworks to improve security, accessibility, and performance.
  2. Implement HTTPS with proper SSL/TLS configuration and enable DNSSEC to enhance transport and DNS security.
  3. Add comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance statements and consent mechanisms.
  4. Publish contact information including security incident response contacts to improve transparency and trust.
  5. Introduce security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options) and conduct regular security audits to strengthen security posture.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Studio RBB
Description
Studio RBB appears to be a creative or digital studio, likely offering multimedia or design services, inferred from the use of Flash content and branding.
Key services
Multimedia content delivery, Creative digital services
Content quality
poor
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
Flash, JavaScript
Performance
moderate
Mobile
poor
Accessibility
poor
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. Website relies on deprecated Flash technology, limiting accessibility and security
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found
  3. No contact information or business addresses visible
  4. Minimal textual content and no structured data present
  5. No social media or external business links except for DNS provider
  6. No analytics or tracking scripts detected
  7. No security headers or HTTPS enforcement visible in provided data
  8. Domain WHOIS data is consistent and domain is active with no privacy protection
Technical notes

Notes

The website relies on legacy Flash technology embedded via JavaScript, which is deprecated and unsupported by most modern browsers, leading to poor accessibility and security risks. No modern CMS or frameworks are detected. Hosting is via Datucentrs, a European provider, with domain DNS managed by their nameservers. The site lacks mobile optimization and SEO best practices, and no analytics or tracking scripts are present. The HTML is minimal with no structured data or metadata beyond basic title and charset. There is no evidence of performance optimization or accessibility features. The technical debt is high, and modernization is strongly recommended to reduce operational risks and improve user experience.
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 studiorbb.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 studiorbb.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.