Skip to main content

Security report for trede.be

tRede vzw · Non-profit · Belgium

High risk. 9 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Network security and 2 other checks.

Security score

43/100

Risk levelHigh

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

tRede vzw is a non-profit collaborative network of 13 care providers based in the Flemish Brabant region of Belgium. It focuses on delivering coordinated care and support services for persons with disabilities and special support needs by pooling expertise and resources. The website presents a professional and well-structured digital presence with clear navigation and relevant content aimed at clients, partners, and employees. Technically, the site uses common frontend libraries such as Bootstrap and jQuery, with moderate performance and good mobile optimization. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enforced, but lacks some security headers and cookie consent mechanisms. WHOIS data is unavailable due to registry restrictions, which limits domain trust verification. Overall, the site is trustworthy and serves its non-profit mission effectively.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
28/ 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

9 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

  2. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: PostgreSQL

      Port 5432 (PostgreSQL) is publicly accessible - PostgreSQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to PostgreSQL using firewall or VPN

      • 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

  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 trede.be

This scan found 28 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
15
Email security
75
DNS health
65
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
28
Average
43

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 · found on this site
  • 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 organization operates in the non-profit healthcare sector, specifically focusing on disability support services in a regional Belgian market. Its business model is collaborative, leveraging partnerships with multiple care providers to offer a broad range of services including short-term care, care guidance, and open placements. The website highlights a strong partnership ecosystem with direct links to member organizations. Revenue streams are likely grant and government funded, typical for non-profits. The presence of testimonials and organizational documents adds credibility. Growth indicators include service expansion announcements. The company targets clients with disabilities and their families, as well as potential employees and volunteers.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic to moderate security maturity level. HTTPS is properly implemented, ensuring encrypted communications. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options reduces protection against common web attacks. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are published, which may impact readiness for security events. No tracking or analytics scripts were detected, reducing privacy risks. The lack of cookie consent mechanisms indicates partial GDPR compliance. No visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a non-profit informational site but could be improved with standard best practices.

Recommendations

  1. Implement standard security headers (CSP, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options) to enhance protection.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner to comply with GDPR and improve user privacy transparency.
  3. Publish incident response and security policies to demonstrate security governance.
  4. Create a terms of service page to clarify user and service terms.
  5. Consider adding a security.txt file to facilitate vulnerability reporting and improve security culture.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
tRede vzw
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
tRede vzw
Description
tRede is a collaborative partnership of 13 care providers in (East) Flemish Brabant, Belgium, focused on providing support and services for people with disabilities or special support needs by pooling experience and quality.
Key services
Korte Zorg (short-term care), Zorgpunt (care point for guidance), Zorgaanbod partners (partner care offerings), Open Plaatsen (available places for clients)
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap CSS, Font Awesome, jQuery, Revolution Slider, Isotope Masonry, Magnific Popup, CarouFredSel
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No visible vulnerable libraries

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and navigation.
  2. No WAF or security blocking detected.
  3. WHOIS data is unavailable due to registry restrictions.
  4. Privacy policy is present but no cookie consent mechanism found.
  5. No terms of service or explicit security policies published.
  6. Contact information is clearly provided with email and phone.
  7. Multiple partner organizations linked with valid domains.
  8. No analytics or tracking scripts detected.
  9. No advertising or marketing scripts detected.
  10. Website uses common frontend libraries and frameworks.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a traditional frontend stack with Bootstrap for responsive design, Font Awesome for icons, and jQuery-based plugins for sliders and masonry layouts. The site loads external CSS and JS from its own domain, indicating self-hosting or dedicated hosting. Performance is moderate with some large images in sliders but generally acceptable. Mobile optimization is good due to Bootstrap usage. Accessibility is basic with no explicit ARIA or accessibility features detected. SEO is basic with meta description and keywords but no Open Graph or structured data found. The site does not appear to use a CMS or modern frameworks. Technical debt is low but modernization opportunities exist, such as adopting modern JS frameworks and improving 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 trede.be. 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 trede.be.

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.