Skip to main content

Security report for symbolsproject.eu

SYMBOLS Project · Other · N/a

Medium risk. 10 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

53/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The SYMBOLS project website serves as an educational platform focused on exploring cultural symbols, particularly those found in cemeteries across Europe. It is a collaborative initiative involving six European partners including municipal councils, educational institutions, and cultural organizations. The site offers a symbols database, interpretative content, and special tours, targeting audiences interested in cultural heritage and funerary arts. The business model is primarily educational and cultural, with a niche market position supported by reputable European partners. Technically, the website is built on ASP.NET Web Forms with legacy JavaScript libraries such as jQuery 1.8.2 and jQuery UI 1.9.1. It integrates Google Analytics and Google Maps API for tracking and mapping functionalities. The site demonstrates moderate performance and basic mobile optimization, with room for improvement in accessibility and SEO practices. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS ensuring encrypted communication but lacks visible security headers like Content Security Policy and uses outdated JavaScript libraries that may expose vulnerabilities. No privacy or cookie policies are present, indicating gaps in GDPR compliance. No contact emails or phone numbers are provided, limiting direct communication channels. Overall, the website is a credible cultural heritage resource with moderate technical maturity and security posture. Strategic improvements in security headers, library updates, and privacy compliance would enhance trust and resilience.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
10/ 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

10 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 symbolsproject.eu

This scan found 28 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
62
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
10
Average
53

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 SYMBOLS project operates as a small-scale, collaborative cultural heritage initiative with a focus on European cemeteries and symbolic art. Its competitive advantage lies in its multi-partner European consortium, providing authoritative content and localized tours. The business model is non-commercial, emphasizing education and cultural preservation. Revenue streams likely include public funding and grants. The target customers are cultural enthusiasts, researchers, and tourists. The partnership ecosystem includes municipal councils, educational institutions, and cultural organizations, enhancing credibility and reach. Growth indicators are limited but supported by digital content and mobile app offerings.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic security maturity level with HTTPS enabled and no visible exposed sensitive data. However, the use of outdated JavaScript libraries (jQuery 1.8.2) introduces potential vulnerabilities. The absence of security headers such as Content Security Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options reduces protection against common web attacks. No incident response or security contact information is provided, indicating limited readiness for security events. GDPR compliance is weak due to missing privacy and cookie policies. Overall, the security posture is moderate but requires improvements to align with best practices and regulatory requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Update all JavaScript libraries, especially jQuery and jQuery UI, to their latest secure versions to mitigate known vulnerabilities.
  2. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies clearly accessible on the website to improve GDPR compliance and user trust.
  3. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against common web threats.
  4. Provide clear contact information for security incidents, including dedicated security or abuse email addresses, to improve incident response readiness.
  5. Enhance mobile optimization and accessibility features to improve user experience and broaden audience reach.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
SYMBOLS Project
Description
SYMBOLS is a joint project of 6 partners across Europe aiming to strengthen knowledge and public awareness of cemeteries and funerary arts as an important part of European cultural heritage and memory.
Key services
Symbols database, Educational content on symbols and their meanings, Special cemetery tours, Mobile guide app
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
ASP.NET Web Forms, jQuery 1.8.2, jQuery UI 1.9.1, Google Analytics, Google Maps API, Google Fonts (Roboto)
Frameworks
ASP.NET Web Forms
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
60/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Use of Google Analytics with async loading
  • No visible exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a cultural heritage educational project focused on symbols and cemeteries across Europe.
  2. Content is well structured with clear navigation and thematic sections.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the explored page.
  4. Use of outdated JavaScript libraries may pose security risks.
  5. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly provided on this page.
  6. Multiple European municipal and educational partners linked, enhancing trust.
  7. No visible security headers detected in HTML source.
  8. HTTPS is used, ensuring encrypted communication.
  9. Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager are used for tracking.
  10. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected; content fully accessible.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on an older ASP.NET Web Forms framework, indicating legacy technology usage. The front-end relies on outdated jQuery and jQuery UI versions, which may pose security risks. Integration with Google services such as Analytics, Tag Manager, Fonts, and Maps is evident, providing tracking and mapping capabilities. The site uses asynchronous script loading for performance but lacks modern front-end frameworks or CMS platforms. Performance is moderate with basic mobile responsiveness. SEO is basic with meta tags present but no advanced structured data like JSON-LD. Accessibility features are minimal. The technical stack suggests potential modernization opportunities to improve security, performance, and maintainability.
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 symbolsproject.eu. 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 symbolsproject.eu.

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.