Skip to main content

Security report for triad.cz

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

69/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website www.triad.cz is a small business site built on the Wix platform. The site content is minimal and lacks detailed business descriptions, contact information, or legal policies. The technical infrastructure relies on Wix's standard hosting and scripts, with basic mobile optimization and moderate performance. Security posture is limited, with no advanced security headers or policies detected. The absence of WHOIS data and privacy policies reduces trust and compliance confidence. Overall, the site appears to be a basic online presence without strong business or security maturity.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
60/ 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

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

  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 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';…

  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 triad.cz

This scan found 23 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. 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
62
Security headers
35
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
60
Average
69

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 lack of detailed content and contact information, the business intelligence is limited. The site does not clearly state its market position, business model, or key services. No partnerships or certifications are visible. The target audience and industry classification remain unclear, though the site likely serves a small business or local clientele. The absence of analytics and marketing tools suggests limited digital marketing efforts.

Security posture

The security posture is basic with HTTPS enabled but no visible security headers or incident response information. No forms or data collection mechanisms were found, reducing immediate risk exposure. However, the lack of privacy and cookie policies indicates non-compliance with GDPR and other privacy regulations. The missing WHOIS data and domain registration details further reduce trustworthiness. The site would benefit from implementing security best practices and compliance documentation.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with user consent mechanisms to ensure GDPR compliance.
  2. Add clear contact information including company email and phone numbers to improve business credibility.
  3. Enhance security by adding HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  4. Improve SEO and accessibility by adding meta tags, structured data, and accessible navigation features.
  5. Obtain and publish WHOIS domain registration details or ensure domain registration information is accessible to improve trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
Wix, JavaScript, Core-js, Focus-within-polyfill, Intl-segmenter-polyfill
Platforms
Wix.com
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
40/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is built on Wix platform with standard Wix scripts and styles.
  2. No WHOIS data available, indicating privacy protection or unregistered domain.
  3. No visible contact information, privacy policy, cookie policy, or terms of service found.
  4. No forms detected in the accessible HTML content.
  5. No social media or external business-related links found.
  6. Website content is minimal and lacks business descriptive information.
  7. No security headers or advanced security configurations detected.
  8. No analytics or tracking scripts detected beyond Wix standard scripts.
  9. No advertising or marketing tools detected.
  10. Mobile optimization is basic but present.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses Wix CMS and standard Wix JavaScript libraries including polyfills for legacy browser support. Hosting is provided by Wix's infrastructure. Performance is moderate with no advanced optimization detected. The site lacks modern SEO and accessibility features. No third-party analytics or marketing tools are integrated. The technical debt appears low but the site is minimalistic and could benefit from modernization and enhanced technical SEO.
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. 69/100Medium32 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with triad.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 triad.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.