TESCOMA s.r.o. · Retail · Czech Republic
Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.
TESCOMA s.r.o. operates a multilingual website offering a comprehensive range of kitchen stainless steel cookware, utensils, and accessories for cooking and table use. The company targets a broad general audience interested in kitchenware products and maintains a consistent brand presence across multiple country-specific domains. The business model is retail-focused, serving customers primarily in the Czech Republic and other European markets. The website content is professionally presented with good design and navigation, although mobile optimization and accessibility are basic. Technically, the website uses standard HTML, CSS, and JavaScript technologies, including an outdated version of jQuery (1.4.4) and Google Analytics for tracking. The site lacks modern security headers and does not provide visible privacy or cookie policies, which impacts compliance and user trust. Performance is moderate, and SEO optimization is good based on meta tags and multilingual support. From a security perspective, the site uses Google Analytics asynchronously but lacks visible HTTPS confirmation and security headers in the provided data. The WHOIS lookup failed to return registrar or registrant information, raising concerns about domain registration legitimacy. No contact information or incident response details are provided, limiting transparency and trust. Overall, the security posture is moderate but requires improvements in SSL configuration, security headers, and compliance documentation. The overall risk assessment indicates a functional and professional retail website with some technical and compliance gaps. Strategic recommendations include updating JavaScript libraries, implementing HTTPS and security headers, publishing privacy and cookie policies, and improving transparency with contact and incident response information to enhance trust and security posture.
Scanned
NIS2 Art. 21(2)
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.
8 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.
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.
Forces HTTPS connections
What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"
Prevents clickjacking attacks
What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"
Controls resources the browser is allowed to load
What to do: Implement a Content-Security-Policy appropriate for your application
These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.
GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy
What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently
GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage
What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes
GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies
What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit
Detected services: Google Analytics
What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy
Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com
This scan found 29 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.
€25per month
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.
€39.90one-time
Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.
Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.
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
Not counted
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.
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
Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.
Leaked records that mention tescoma.com, from OffSeq Breach.
10 subdomains affected
See the 10 newest leaked credentials
A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for tescoma.com.
Select it in the checkout above.
Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.
Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.
Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.
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
Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.
Reviews of this site
Share your experience with tescoma.com. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.
Community rating
No published reviews yet. Be the first to review tescoma.com.