Skip to main content

Security report for thecompetitionplatform.co.uk

The Competition Platform · Media · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

75/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Competition Platform is a UK-based SaaS business founded in 2016, specializing in providing a platform that enables publishers, brands, and agencies to build, run, and analyze competitions effectively. The company targets a niche market of marketing professionals and media companies, boasting thousands of clients and recognizable brand partnerships. Their business model revolves around offering a digital platform service that streamlines competition management and analytics. Technically, the website is built on a custom stack utilizing Bootstrap, jQuery, Google reCAPTCHA, and FontAwesome, with a focus on responsive design and moderate performance. The site employs HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate and includes standard privacy and cookie policies, along with a cookie consent mechanism. However, some modern security headers are missing, and no explicit security or incident response policies are published. From a security perspective, the platform demonstrates good practices such as CSRF token usage and CAPTCHA protection on forms, but lacks a formal security policy and vulnerability disclosure program. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. The domain registration is consistent with the business history and shows legitimacy, registered through a reputable registrar with a long-term expiry. Overall, the website presents a professional and trustworthy front with good content quality and technical implementation. Strategic improvements in security policy transparency and enhanced security headers would further strengthen their posture. The risk level is moderate to low, with no immediate critical issues identified.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 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

3 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 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 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

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

Keep watching thecompetitionplatform.co.uk

This scan found 20 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
77
Security headers
50
Email security
70
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
75

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 Competition Platform holds a solid position in the media and marketing technology sector, serving a broad client base of publishers, brands, and agencies. Their competitive advantage lies in a specialized platform that simplifies competition management and analytics, supported by a growing ecosystem of recognizable clients. Revenue streams likely include subscription fees or service charges for platform usage. The company is relatively small but established, with a clear UK presence and a parent company named DMRI. Their partnership ecosystem includes a dedicated blog subdomain and multiple brand collaborations showcased on the site. Growth indicators include a decade-long domain age and active client engagement. Strategic observations suggest focusing on expanding security transparency and enhancing compliance documentation to support scaling and trust.

Security posture

The current security maturity level is moderate, with foundational protections such as HTTPS, CSRF tokens, and CAPTCHA integration on forms. The absence of security headers like Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options represents an area for improvement. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found, indicating good operational security hygiene. Compliance with GDPR is implied through privacy and cookie policies, but explicit incident response contacts or security policies are missing. The platform would benefit from publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy and security.txt file to enhance transparency and readiness. Overall, the security culture appears functional but could be elevated with formalized policies and enhanced technical controls.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to mitigate common web attacks.
  2. Publish a formal security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
  3. Establish and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Conduct regular third-party library audits and update dependencies to minimize vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all visitors.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
DATA MARKETING RESEARCH INNOVATION
VAT number
GB 119 3852 04
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
The Competition Platform
Description
Bringing Publishers, Brands and users together. Easily build, run & analyse competitions. Join 1000’s of companies already working with The Competition Platform.
Key services
Competition building, Competition running, Competition analytics
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap, jQuery, Google reCAPTCHA, FontAwesome, Google Fonts, CookieConsent
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • CSRF token present
  • Google reCAPTCHA on contact form
  • Cookie consent banner

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Google Analytics (gtag.js)
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website uses HTTPS with valid SSL
  2. Contact form secured with CSRF token and reCAPTCHA
  3. Cookie consent implemented
  4. No exposed sensitive data found
  5. No security.txt or explicit security policy found
  6. No social media links detected
  7. Clear business contact phone and physical address provided
  8. Multiple client logos displayed indicating trust
  9. No broken links or errors detected in HTML content
Technical notes

Notes

The website employs a modern front-end stack with Bootstrap for responsive design, jQuery for DOM manipulation, and Google reCAPTCHA for bot mitigation. The use of Google Fonts and FontAwesome enhances visual appeal. Cookie consent is managed via a popular open-source library. The site is custom-built rather than using a common CMS, which may reduce some attack surface but requires dedicated maintenance. Performance is moderate with no major issues detected, and mobile optimization is good. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and structured navigation. However, the absence of certain security headers and limited accessibility features indicate areas for technical improvement. Hosting details are not explicitly disclosed, but the domain uses a reputable registrar and CDN for client logos. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid but could benefit from modernization in security and accessibility.
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 thecompetitionplatform.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 thecompetitionplatform.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.