Skip to main content

Security report for tgw-group.com

TGW Logistics GmbH · Transportation · Austria

High risk. 7 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

47/100

Risk levelHigh

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

TGW Logistics GmbH is a mature, foundation-owned company headquartered in Austria, recognized as a global leader in warehouse automation and logistics solutions. The company offers a comprehensive portfolio of automated systems, software, and services tailored to various industries including fashion, grocery, industrial, and consumer goods. With over 50 years of experience and a workforce exceeding 4,500 employees worldwide, TGW Logistics positions itself as a trusted systems integrator focused on enabling supply chain flexibility and operational excellence. Technically, the website is built on TYPO3 CMS and employs modern web technologies including Google Tag Manager for analytics. The site is well-structured, mobile-optimized, and rich in content, featuring extensive customer success stories and detailed service descriptions. However, the absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS support is a critical security deficiency that undermines user trust and data protection. Security posture is weak due to the lack of HTTPS and TLS protocols, despite the presence of some security headers. Privacy compliance is partially met with a comprehensive privacy policy and GDPR indicators, but the lack of a cookie consent mechanism is a gap. The domain is mature and consistent with the business claims, but nearing expiry, which poses a renewal risk. Overall, TGW Logistics demonstrates strong business credibility and digital maturity but must urgently address its SSL/TLS configuration to ensure secure communications and maintain trust. Strategic improvements in security and privacy compliance will enhance the company's risk profile and user confidence.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of tgw-group.com. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 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

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

    • 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

  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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

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

Keep watching tgw-group.com

This scan found 18 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. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

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
0
Security headers
65
Email security
50
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
Average
47

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

TGW Logistics operates in the transportation sector, specializing in warehouse automation and logistics technology. Its business model revolves around providing end-to-end solutions including hardware, software, and services to optimize fulfillment centers globally. The company targets medium to large enterprises across multiple industries requiring advanced supply chain solutions. TGW's competitive advantage lies in its extensive experience, global presence, and comprehensive portfolio. The company reinvests profits into innovation and social entrepreneurship, enhancing its brand reputation. Partnerships and customer success stories indicate a robust ecosystem and market acceptance. The website content and domain age support a stable and credible business operation with growth potential.

Security posture

The current security maturity level is low due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS support, exposing the site to risks such as data interception and man-in-the-middle attacks. While some security headers are implemented, critical TLS protocols and strong cipher suites are missing. There is no evidence of incident response policies or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms. Privacy practices are partially compliant with GDPR, but cookie consent is lacking. The business impact of these vulnerabilities includes potential loss of customer trust and regulatory non-compliance. The security culture appears underdeveloped in web security aspects, necessitating immediate remediation.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable and configure TLS 1.2 or higher with strong cipher suites and OCSP stapling.
  3. Implement a cookie consent banner/mechanism to comply with GDPR and enhance privacy transparency.
  4. Establish and publish a security policy and incident response contact information.
  5. Regularly audit and update security headers and monitor for vulnerabilities to maintain a strong security posture.
Technical notes

Notes

The website infrastructure is based on Apache server and TYPO3 CMS, indicating a mature and scalable platform. The use of Google Tag Manager shows integration with modern analytics tools. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible with good SEO practices including meta tags and structured data. However, the lack of HTTPS and valid SSL certificate is a significant technical risk. Performance data is unavailable, but the site appears content-rich and well-structured. There is an opportunity to modernize security protocols and enhance privacy compliance to reduce technical debt and improve operational resilience.
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. 44/100High23 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with tgw-group.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 tgw-group.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.