Skip to main content

Security report for sugarcalendar.com

Sugar Calendar · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

72/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Sugar Calendar is a specialized WordPress plugin provider focused on delivering a simple, lightweight event calendar solution. The company appears to be a small technology business founded around 2016, targeting WordPress users who need effective event management tools. The website is professionally designed with consistent branding and good content relevance, supporting a niche market position in WordPress plugin development. Technically, the site runs on WordPress with common frameworks like Bootstrap and uses Cloudflare for DNS. Google Analytics and affiliate marketing tools are integrated, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enforced and domain registration locks, but lacks DNSSEC and security headers, and no privacy or cookie policies were detected, which are areas for improvement. Overall, the site is trustworthy and safe for general audiences, with no adult or questionable content detected.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of sugarcalendar.com. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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. 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

    • 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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, Facebook, Twitter, Google APIs

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

  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.

    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching sugarcalendar.com

This scan found 20 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. See sample alerts.

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
65
Security headers
65
Email security
80
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
72

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

Sugar Calendar operates in the technology sector, specifically in WordPress plugin development for event calendars. Their business model centers on software sales and affiliate marketing. The company maintains a focused product offering with a clear target audience of WordPress users. The domain age and registration details align with the business history, supporting legitimacy. The site leverages common marketing and analytics tools, but lacks comprehensive privacy and security disclosures, which could impact compliance and user trust. No partner or subsidiary domains were identified, indicating a standalone operation. The company benefits from consistent branding and positive trust signals such as testimonials and professional design.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and has domain registration protections in place, which are positive security indicators. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers reduces the overall security posture. No vulnerability disclosures or incident response contacts are published, limiting transparency in security management. The use of third-party analytics and affiliate tools introduces moderate user tracking, but no exposed sensitive data or known vulnerabilities were detected in the provided content. Privacy compliance is weak due to missing policies and consent mechanisms. The security score reflects these strengths and gaps, suggesting moderate maturity with room for improvement in policy publication and technical controls.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy with GDPR compliance details.
  2. Implement DNSSEC to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  3. Add standard security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Create and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to improve transparency and incident response readiness.
  5. Provide clear contact information for security incidents, including dedicated security or abuse email addresses.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Sugar Calendar
Description
Most event calendar plugins are either way too simple, or extremely overly complex and bloated. Sugar Calendar is designed to be simple, lightweight, and provide just the major features you need for awesome event management.
Key services
Event calendar plugin for WordPress
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, PHP, JavaScript, jQuery, Bootstrap, FontAwesome, Google Analytics, Cloudflare DNS
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Domain status includes clientDeleteProhibited and other EPP locks

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics via MonsterInsights
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Marketing tools
MonsterInsights Google Analytics plugin
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is a WordPress-based event calendar plugin site
  2. No explicit privacy or cookie policies found in provided content
  3. Uses Google Analytics and affiliate marketing tools
  4. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found in HTML content
  5. Domain is well-registered and locked with GoDaddy registrar
  6. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure found
  7. No security headers detected in provided data
  8. Content is professional and targeted to WordPress users
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with a modern tech stack including PHP, JavaScript, jQuery, Bootstrap, and FontAwesome. It uses Cloudflare for DNS management and GoDaddy as the domain registrar. Performance is moderate with asynchronous loading of scripts and optimized CSS. Mobile optimization is good, and SEO is supported by proper meta tags and structured data (JSON-LD). Accessibility features are basic but present. The site integrates Google Analytics via MonsterInsights and affiliate marketing tools, indicating a mature digital marketing approach. Technical risks include lack of DNSSEC and missing security headers, which should be addressed to reduce attack surface and improve security posture.
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. 74/100Medium23 findings · partial scanView report
  2. 73/100Medium27 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with sugarcalendar.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 sugarcalendar.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.