Skip to main content

Security report for tolleyhealtheconomics.com

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, DNS health and 2 other checks.

Security score

58/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website www.tolleyhealtheconomics.com currently presents only a security verification page employing Google reCAPTCHA v3, indicating that access to actual content is blocked by a Web Application Firewall or bot protection mechanism. No business information, contact details, or policies are accessible, and the WHOIS query returns no registration data, suggesting the domain may be unregistered or newly registered without public WHOIS records. The technical infrastructure shows use of Bootstrap for styling and Google reCAPTCHA for security, but lacks visible content, SEO metadata, or accessibility features. Security posture is minimal with no visible HTTPS or security headers information. Overall, the site is not accessible for meaningful analysis, and the domain's legitimacy is questionable due to missing registration data and lack of business transparency.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 100 · Medium
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

8 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

  2. DNS health

    DNS sends visitors and email to the right servers. Misconfigured records can cause outages or let someone redirect your traffic.

    • High

      Domain Expires Soon

      Domain expires in 4 days

      What to do: Renew domain registration before expiration

  3. 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 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';…

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

Keep watching tolleyhealtheconomics.com

This scan found 26 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
57
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
55
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
58

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

Due to the absence of accessible content and business information, no meaningful business intelligence can be derived. The domain does not present any services, company name, or market positioning. No contact or social media links are available, and no privacy or cookie policies are published. The lack of WHOIS data further limits insights into ownership or operational status. The domain appears inactive or under protection, with no visible commercial or informational presence.

Security posture

The security posture is limited to the presence of Google reCAPTCHA v3, which provides bot mitigation. However, there is no evidence of HTTPS enforcement, security headers, or other best practices. The site is effectively inaccessible due to the security verification, which may protect it from automated attacks but also prevents legitimate access. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is available. The lack of transparency and missing WHOIS data raise concerns about the domain's trustworthiness and operational legitimacy.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and confirm HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate to secure communications.
  2. Publish clear privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  3. Provide accessible website content beyond the security verification page to enable user engagement and SEO.
  4. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance security posture.
  5. Ensure WHOIS registration data is complete and publicly available to improve domain legitimacy and trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. Website content is a security verification page with Google reCAPTCHA v3 and no accessible content, indicating a WAF or bot protection mechanism blocking normal access. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap 5.3.3, Google reCAPTCHA v3
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
30/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA v3 for bot protection

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is inaccessible beyond a security verification page using Google reCAPTCHA v3.
  2. No business or contact information is available on the page.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  4. No visible content or services offered on the site.
  5. WHOIS data is missing or domain is unregistered.
  6. External resources are limited to CDN and Google reCAPTCHA domains.
  7. No social media or contact links present.
  8. Security posture is minimal with only bot protection visible.
  9. SEO and accessibility are poor due to lack of content.
  10. Overall trustworthiness is low due to lack of transparency and domain registration data.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses Bootstrap 5.3.3 for styling and Google reCAPTCHA v3 for bot protection. The HTML content is minimal, consisting solely of a security verification form with no visible business content or metadata such as Open Graph or JSON-LD structured data. No CMS or hosting provider information is discernible. Performance and accessibility cannot be fully assessed due to blocked content. SEO optimization is poor given the lack of meta tags and content. The site lacks security headers and HTTPS status is unknown. Overall, the technical implementation is minimal and focused solely on bot mitigation rather than user experience or business presentation.
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 tolleyhealtheconomics.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 tolleyhealtheconomics.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.