Skip to main content

Security report for tailored-living.co.uk

Other · N/a

High risk. 11 critical or high findings in Network security, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

38/100

Risk levelHigh

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

The website www.tailored-living.co.uk is currently inaccessible, returning a 403 Forbidden error page indicating that access to the content is blocked or forbidden. The page contains no business information, contact details, or any user-interactive elements such as forms. The WHOIS lookup for the domain failed with an error from the Nominet UK registry stating that the domain name cannot be registered due to contravention of naming rules, specifically that the domain contains too many parts. This suggests the domain is either invalid, misconfigured, or not properly registered, which severely limits the legitimacy and trustworthiness of the site. From a technical perspective, the site loads minimal content, primarily a styled error page with embedded SVG graphics and Google Fonts. There are no detectable scripts, analytics, or tracking technologies. The absence of HTTPS information and security headers further indicates a lack of proper security configuration. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies are present, and no contact or business information is available, which negatively impacts business credibility and privacy compliance. Security posture is poor due to the lack of HTTPS, security headers, and the presence of a blocking error page. The domain's WHOIS data absence and registry error raise significant concerns about the domain's legitimacy. Overall, the site appears non-operational or blocked, and no meaningful business or security insights can be drawn from the current content. Strategic recommendations include resolving domain registration issues, implementing HTTPS with valid SSL certificates, adding proper security headers, publishing privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR, and providing clear business and contact information to improve trust and credibility.

Scanned

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

11 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Network security

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

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • 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
    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: PostgreSQL

      Port 5432 (PostgreSQL) is publicly accessible - PostgreSQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to PostgreSQL using firewall or VPN

      • 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
    • 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

  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 Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

  3. 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

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

Keep watching tailored-living.co.uk

This scan found 31 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
57
Security headers
15
Email security
55
DNS health
65
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
35
Average
38

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 · found on this site
  • 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

Due to the inaccessible nature of the website and lack of business content, no meaningful business intelligence can be derived. The domain appears invalid per registry WHOIS error, and no company name, services, or market positioning information is available. The site does not present any competitive advantages, revenue streams, or partnership information. The lack of content and contact details suggests the business is either inactive or the domain is misconfigured.

Security posture

The security posture of the website is very weak. The site lacks HTTPS information and security headers, exposing it to potential interception and attacks if it were operational. The 403 Forbidden error page indicates restricted access, but no WAF or security challenge is detected. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates non-compliance with GDPR and other data protection regulations. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is available. The domain's invalid WHOIS status further undermines trust and security credibility.

Recommendations

  1. Resolve domain registration issues with the registry to ensure the domain is valid and active.
  2. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate to secure communications.
  3. Add essential security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and inform users.
  5. Provide clear business contact information and company details to enhance credibility and trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

None detected. Website returns a 403 Forbidden error page indicating access is blocked or forbidden. No WAF challenge detected. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
moderate

Technology

Performance
slow
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
basic
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website content is inaccessible due to 403 Forbidden error.
  2. No business or contact information is present on the page.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  4. No forms or data collection mechanisms detected.
  5. No security headers or HTTPS information available.
  6. WHOIS data is missing or domain is invalid per registry error.
  7. External resources limited to Google Fonts only.
  8. No analytics or tracking scripts detected.
  9. Website appears non-operational or blocked.
Technical notes

Notes

The website serves a static 403 Forbidden error page with no dynamic content or interactive elements. The only external resources loaded are Google Fonts. No CMS, frameworks, or analytics tools are detected. The site lacks HTTPS and security headers, and no WHOIS data is available to confirm domain legitimacy. Performance is likely slow due to minimal content and lack of optimization. Mobile optimization and accessibility are basic due to the simple error page layout. SEO optimization is poor as the page is marked with 'noindex' and contains no meaningful metadata or structured data.
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 tailored-living.co.uk. 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 tailored-living.co.uk.

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.