Skip to main content

Security report for supertac.cz

SUPERTAC · Other · Czech Republic

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and Security headers.

Security score

64/100

Risk levelMedium

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

SUPERTAC's website is currently in maintenance mode, displaying minimal content and no active business information. The site uses WordPress CMS with a maintenance plugin and includes a login form for administrative access. There is no publicly available contact information, privacy policy, or terms of service, which limits transparency and user trust. The lack of WHOIS data further complicates verification of the domain's legitimacy and ownership. Technically, the site uses jQuery and standard WordPress components but lacks visible security headers or HTTPS confirmation in the provided data. Overall, the digital maturity is low, and the site appears inactive or under redevelopment. From a security perspective, the absence of HTTPS details, security headers, and privacy compliance measures indicates a weak security posture. The login form is present but without visible advanced protections. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is available, which is a concern for security readiness. The domain's WHOIS data is unavailable, suggesting privacy protection or non-registration, which reduces trustworthiness. The overall risk assessment is elevated due to minimal content, lack of transparency, and missing security best practices. Strategic recommendations include implementing HTTPS, publishing privacy and cookie policies, enhancing security headers, and providing clear business and contact information. These steps will improve trust, compliance, and security posture, essential for user confidence and regulatory adherence.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 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

      EU business without adequate privacy measures

      EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

      What to do: Implement comprehensive GDPR compliance including privacy policy, cookie consent, and data protection measures

    • 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

  2. 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';…

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

Keep watching supertac.cz

This scan found 22 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
85
Security headers
15
Email security
85
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
64

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

The business behind SUPERTAC is not clearly identifiable from the website content or WHOIS data. The site is in maintenance mode, providing no insight into market positioning, services, or customer segments. No partnerships or subsidiaries are indicated. The lack of business information and contact details suggests either a small or inactive entity. Without visible revenue streams or growth indicators, the business intelligence is limited. The company appears to target a Czech audience based on language and domain, but no further segmentation is available.

Security posture

The security posture of the SUPERTAC website is currently weak. The absence of HTTPS confirmation and security headers exposes the site to potential risks. No privacy or cookie policies are present, indicating non-compliance with GDPR and related regulations. The login form exists but lacks visible advanced security controls. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are published, reducing preparedness for security events. The missing WHOIS data further complicates trust and accountability. Overall, the site requires significant improvements to meet basic security and compliance standards.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a valid SSL/TLS certificate and enforce HTTPS site-wide.
  2. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR.
  3. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Provide clear business contact information and legal pages to enhance transparency.
  5. Establish and publicize incident response and vulnerability disclosure procedures.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
SUPERTAC
Content quality
poor
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, WordPress, Maintenance Plugin
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 currently in maintenance mode with minimal content.
  2. No contact information, privacy policy, or legal pages found.
  3. No security headers or HTTPS information available from provided data.
  4. No WHOIS data available, indicating privacy protection or unregistered domain.
  5. Website uses WordPress CMS with a maintenance plugin.
  6. No analytics or advertising scripts detected.
  7. No social media or external business links found.
  8. No forms collecting sensitive data except a login form for site administrators.
  9. Logo image is present and consistent with site branding.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS and uses jQuery and a maintenance plugin to display a maintenance mode page. The technical infrastructure appears basic with no advanced frameworks or platforms detected. Performance is moderate but limited by minimal content. Mobile optimization and accessibility are basic, with no evident enhancements. SEO optimization is minimal, lacking meta descriptions and structured data. The site does not include analytics or marketing tools, indicating low digital maturity. Technical risks include outdated plugins or libraries and lack of 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 supertac.cz. 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 supertac.cz.

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.