Skip to main content

Security report for torgy.no

Torgy Group · Energy · Norway

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Torgy Group is a medium-sized international manufacturer specializing in pipe supports and customized steel and insulation products serving diverse sectors including oil and gas, renewable energy, water, wind, and carbon capture industries. The company operates globally with offices in Norway, Latvia, the UK, and India, positioning itself as a reliable supplier with a broad product portfolio and engineering services. The website reflects a professional digital presence built on WordPress with modern technologies such as Google Analytics and reCAPTCHA, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS and anti-bot measures but lacks advanced security headers and published security policies. Privacy compliance is addressed with visible privacy and cookie policies aligned with GDPR. However, the absence of WHOIS data limits domain trust verification, though the website content and contact information support legitimacy. Overall, the site is functional, professional, and trustworthy but could improve in security transparency and domain registration clarity.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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

6 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 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. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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

  3. 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 torgy.no

This scan found 20 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. 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
72
Security headers
15
Email security
100
DNS health
85
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
68
Average
60

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

Torgy Group targets industrial clients requiring specialized pipe support and steel fabrication solutions, leveraging a business model focused on manufacturing and engineering services. Their market position is strengthened by international offices and a comprehensive product range including high-grade materials like stainless steel and titanium. The company emphasizes quality and sustainability, supported by certifications and transparency documents. Their digital ecosystem includes standard marketing and analytics tools, with no evident affiliate or advertising networks. Growth indicators include recent news about investments in production technology. The partnership ecosystem is not explicitly detailed but includes subsidiaries in Latvia, the UK, and India, suggesting a geographically diversified operational footprint.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and Google reCAPTCHA for form security, indicating baseline security practices. However, it lacks several recommended HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options, which could mitigate risks like clickjacking and MIME sniffing. No security policy or incident response contact information is published, which is a gap in transparency and preparedness. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the content. The absence of a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file limits external security engagement. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be enhanced by implementing additional headers, publishing security policies, and improving incident response visibility.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive HTTP security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to strengthen protection against common web attacks.
  2. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information on the website to improve transparency and readiness.
  3. Regularly update WordPress core, themes, and plugins to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
  4. Consider establishing a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to engage with security researchers and improve security posture.
  5. Enhance accessibility features and conduct periodic security audits to maintain compliance and trust.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Torgy Group
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Torgy Group
Description
Torgy Group is a pipe-support manufacturer, producing customized steel and isolation products for an extensive pipe industry ranging from oil and gas to water, wind and carbon capture. They are a global supplier of pipe support on- and off-shore and manufacture customized steel products for other industries as well.
Key services
Engineering and design, Metal operations including cutting, bending, painting, welding, machining, Inspection by certified inspectors
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.8.1, PHP, jQuery, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, reCAPTCHA v3, W3 Total Cache, Jetpack
Frameworks
Enfold WordPress Theme
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA v3 for forms
  • No exposed sensitive data found

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Jetpack Stats
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Jetpack Stats
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and content rich
  2. Multiple international office contacts provided
  3. No WHOIS data available, limiting domain trust verification
  4. Use of modern web technologies and analytics
  5. Privacy and cookie policies present and GDPR compliant
  6. No visible security policy or incident response info
  7. No terms of service page detected
  8. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 6.8.1 using the Enfold theme, leveraging common web technologies such as jQuery and Google services for analytics and tag management. Performance is moderate with caching enabled via W3 Total Cache. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and basic accessibility features. SEO is supported by proper meta tags, Open Graph, and JSON-LD structured data. There is no indication of advanced hosting provider details or CDN usage beyond WordPress.com resources. Technical risks include potential outdated plugins or themes if not maintained and missing security headers. Opportunities exist to modernize security configurations and improve accessibility compliance.
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 torgy.no. 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 torgy.no.

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.