Skip to main content

Security report for thebrandsurgery.co.uk

The Brand Surgery · Healthcare · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

59/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Brand Surgery is a specialized branding agency focused on healthcare, heritage, and community sectors, delivering creative brand strategies that foster trust, clarity, and connection. The website reflects a niche market positioning with professional design and consistent branding. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with WooCommerce and Divi theme, integrating modern marketing and analytics tools such as Google Analytics and Facebook Pixel. The site is mobile optimized and performs moderately well, though accessibility features are basic. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and cookie consent mechanisms, but lacks advanced security headers and formal security policies. WHOIS data is unavailable due to domain naming rules violation, which raises some legitimacy concerns, though the website content and presentation suggest a legitimate business. Overall, the site is professional and trustworthy but would benefit from enhanced privacy and security disclosures.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
100/ 100 · Low
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

4 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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 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';…
  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. Network security

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

    • 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

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

Keep watching thebrandsurgery.co.uk

This scan found 24 issues across 5 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
69
Security headers
30
Email security
70
DNS health
65
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
100
Average
59

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention thebrandsurgery.co.uk, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
4
Employees
0
Customers
4
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
0%

3 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 thebrandsurgery.co.uk.

Select it in the checkout above.

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

The Brand Surgery operates as a small, focused branding consultancy serving healthcare, heritage, and community clients in the UK. Its business model centers on creative brand strategy services, targeting organizations requiring specialized communication and branding solutions. The company leverages digital marketing tools and maintains social media presence on Facebook and Twitter. The absence of detailed company registration or contact information on the site limits transparency. The lack of WHOIS data due to domain registration issues is a notable risk factor. The firm appears to maintain a consistent brand identity and positions itself as a trusted partner in its niche sectors.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and includes a cookie consent mechanism, indicating baseline compliance with privacy regulations. However, it lacks visible security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options, which could enhance protection against common web attacks. No security.txt or incident response information is published, limiting transparency for vulnerability reporting. The absence of exposed sensitive data and use of reputable plugins reduce immediate risk. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be improved by adopting additional security best practices and formalizing incident response channels.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and terms of service pages to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Add security headers like Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance protection.
  3. Publish a security.txt file and incident response policy to facilitate vulnerability disclosure and improve transparency.
  4. Provide clear company contact information including emails and phone numbers to enhance business credibility.
  5. Investigate and resolve domain WHOIS registration issues to ensure domain legitimacy and reduce risk.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
The Brand Surgery
Description
Creative brand strategy for healthcare, heritage and community sectors. The Brand Surgery blends imagination and insight to build trust, clarity and connection.
Key services
Brand strategy, Creative branding, Communication clarity, Connection building
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, WooCommerce, Divi theme, Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, Ajax Search Pro, WooCommerce Payments, Mailchimp for WooCommerce, jQuery, Google Fonts
Frameworks
WordPress, WooCommerce
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, MonsterInsights
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel
Marketing tools
MonsterInsights, Mailchimp
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenge
  2. WHOIS data is unavailable due to domain naming rules violation
  3. Website uses modern WordPress CMS with WooCommerce and Divi theme
  4. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented
  5. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages found
  6. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found in the HTML content
  7. Social media presence includes Facebook and Twitter
  8. Tracking includes Google Analytics and Facebook Pixel
  9. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure found
  10. Content is professional and targeted at healthcare and heritage branding
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress CMS platform using the Divi theme and WooCommerce for e-commerce capabilities. It integrates multiple third-party services including Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, Mailchimp, and Ajax Search Pro, indicating a mature digital marketing setup. The site loads with moderate performance and is mobile optimized. Accessibility features are basic but present. The technical stack is standard for small to medium-sized businesses, with opportunities to improve security configurations and performance optimizations. No critical technical vulnerabilities were detected in the HTML content.
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 thebrandsurgery.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 thebrandsurgery.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.