Skip to main content

Security report for travel-free.cz

Retail · Czech Republic

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

63/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Travel FREE is a retail business operating Europe's No. 1 Bordershop, targeting general consumers interested in cross-border shopping. The website presents a professional appearance with a clear business focus on retail and travel-related shopping services. The company promotes a mobile app available on both Apple App Store and Google Play, indicating a digital engagement strategy. The technical infrastructure includes modern web technologies such as Google Tag Manager and Usercentrics for consent management, ensuring compliance with cookie regulations. The website is accessible without any blocking or WAF challenges, and it uses HTTPS to secure communications. However, the absence of publicly available WHOIS data and lack of explicit privacy policy or contact information reduces transparency and trustworthiness to some extent. Security posture is moderate with room for improvement in security headers and published policies. Overall, the website is functional and professional but would benefit from enhanced transparency and security documentation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
40/ 100 · High
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

5 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 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. 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 travel-free.cz

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. 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
72
Security headers
90
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
40
Average
63

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 business positions itself as a leading European bordershop retailer, leveraging digital channels including a mobile app to engage customers. The market positioning as Europe's No. 1 Bordershop suggests a strong competitive advantage in the retail sector focused on cross-border shopping. The business model appears to be retail sales with a focus on travel shoppers. The website's use of Google Tag Manager and Usercentrics indicates an investment in marketing and privacy compliance tools. However, the lack of visible contact details and corporate information limits the ability to fully assess business scale and partnerships. No certifications or security policies are published, which is common in retail but could be improved for trust. The company likely targets European consumers traveling near borders seeking duty-free or discounted goods.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses a consent management platform, which are positive security practices. However, no explicit security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, or X-Frame-Options were detected in the provided data, which are recommended to enhance security. No vulnerability disclosures or security.txt files are present, and no incident response contacts are published. The absence of WHOIS data reduces transparency and could be a concern for some users. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be improved by implementing additional HTTP security headers, publishing security policies, and providing clear contact channels for security incidents.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy page accessible from the homepage.
  2. Add standard security headers including Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options.
  3. Publish contact information including a dedicated security or abuse email address.
  4. Consider publishing a security.txt file and vulnerability disclosure policy to enhance transparency.
  5. Improve WHOIS transparency if possible or provide corporate information on the website to build trust.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Travel FREE - Europe's No 1 Bordershop
Key services
Bordershop retail services, Mobile app for shopping
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Tag Manager, Usercentrics Consent Management, Google Fonts (Jost), JavaScript, CSS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Consent management for cookies
  • Ads data redaction enabled in GTM

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Usercentrics
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. WHOIS data unavailable, indicating privacy protection or domain not registered publicly.
  2. Website is accessible with no blocking or WAF challenge.
  3. No explicit contact information or privacy policy page found in the provided content.
  4. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented via Usercentrics.
  5. Website uses modern web technologies and Google Tag Manager for analytics.
  6. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found.
  7. No business certifications or security policies published on site.
  8. No forms detected in the provided HTML snippet.
  9. No social media links explicitly found in the provided content.
  10. Mobile optimization and SEO appear adequate based on meta tags and responsive design.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses modern front-end technologies including Google Tag Manager for analytics and Usercentrics for cookie consent management, indicating a mature digital marketing and privacy compliance setup. Google Fonts are used for typography, and the site is mobile responsive with appropriate viewport settings. Performance is moderate based on the use of asynchronous script loading and minimal blocking resources. No CMS or hosting provider information was detected. The site lacks advanced accessibility features but provides basic responsive design and SEO meta tags. Technical debt appears low but could be improved with enhanced security headers and more explicit corporate information.
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. 58/100Medium29 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with travel-free.cz. 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 travel-free.cz.

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.