Skip to main content

Security report for transip.nl

Transip BV · Technology · Netherlands

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and Security headers.

Security score

56/100

Risk levelMedium

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

TransIP BV is a well-established Dutch hosting provider and domain registrar, operating since 2003 and serving over 150,000 customers. Positioned as the largest registrar in the Netherlands, it offers a broad range of services including domain registration, web hosting, VPS, cloud hosting, and backup solutions. The company is part of the team.blue group, reflecting a strong corporate backing. The website demonstrates a high level of professionalism, with comprehensive content, clear navigation, and good mobile optimization. Technically, the site uses modern marketing and analytics tools such as HubSpot and Google Tag Manager, and integrates iubenda for cookie compliance, indicating digital maturity. However, a critical security gap exists due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and lack of HTTPS enforcement, which significantly impacts the security posture. The domain registration data is consistent with the business claims, supporting legitimacy. Overall, while the business and website quality are strong, immediate remediation of SSL/TLS issues is essential to improve security and trust.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of transip.nl. 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

6 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

      EU business without adequate privacy measures

      EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

      What to do: Implement comprehensive GDPR compliance including privacy policy, cookie consent, and data protection measures

    • 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. 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 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 transip.nl

This scan found 17 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
50
Security headers
65
Email security
50
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
Average
56

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

TransIP operates in the technology sector, focusing on domain registration and hosting services. Its business model revolves around providing scalable hosting solutions, including VPS and cloud services, targeting individuals and businesses in the Netherlands. The company leverages a strong brand presence and a large customer base, supported by a parent company, team.blue nl B.V. Revenue streams likely include domain registrations, hosting subscriptions, and add-on services such as backups and security tools. The website content and structure suggest a customer-centric approach with educational resources and personalized product recommendations. The affiliate program and integration with marketing tools indicate active customer acquisition strategies. The company maintains a transparent online presence with legal and security information readily accessible.

Security posture

The current security posture of the website is moderate to poor due to the lack of a valid SSL certificate and absence of HTTPS support, which is a critical vulnerability. While DNS records show proper SPF and DMARC configurations with strict reject policies, the transport layer security is severely lacking. No HSTS, OCSP stapling, or modern TLS protocols are enabled, exposing users to potential man-in-the-middle attacks. The website does not appear to have a security.txt file or explicit incident response contact channels. Privacy compliance is well addressed through iubenda integration and clear privacy policies. The absence of exposed sensitive data and use of secure forms are positive aspects, but the SSL deficiency overshadows these strengths. Immediate action to deploy valid SSL certificates and enable HTTPS is strongly recommended.

Recommendations

  1. Deploy and maintain a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) with includeSubDomains and preload directives.
  3. Implement OCSP stapling to improve certificate revocation checks and reduce latency.
  4. Upgrade server configuration to support TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3 with strong cipher suites.
  5. Publish a security.txt file and provide clear incident response contact information.
  6. Continue to maintain and update privacy and cookie compliance mechanisms.
  7. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking tools to minimize privacy risks.
  8. Enhance accessibility features and conduct periodic accessibility testing.
  9. Monitor DNS and domain registration settings to enable domain protection locks.
  10. Leverage trust indicators such as certifications and customer testimonials more prominently.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a custom or proprietary platform with extensive use of JavaScript and integrations with HubSpot, iubenda, and Google Tag Manager. The site is mobile responsive and well-structured with semantic HTML and CSS. Performance is currently slow with a load time of over 21 seconds and a large number of resources (138). There is room for optimization in resource loading and caching strategies. The DNS infrastructure is robust with multiple authoritative nameservers and proper MX records for email. However, the SSL/TLS configuration is non-functional, which is a major technical risk. The site uses modern marketing and accessibility tools, indicating a mature digital infrastructure. Opportunities exist to improve performance, security headers, and modernize TLS support to enhance overall technical 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. 78/100Low27 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with transip.nl. 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 transip.nl.

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.