Skip to main content

Security report for tsb.cz

Other

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and Security headers.

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website www.tsb.cz is currently inaccessible due to an HTTP 429 Too Many Requests error, indicating that the site is either rate limited or protected by a generic web application firewall (WAF). This blockage prevents access to any meaningful content, metadata, or business information, severely limiting the ability to analyze the company's digital presence or security posture. The WHOIS lookup returned no registration data, suggesting the domain may be privacy protected or unregistered, which further complicates legitimacy assessment. Without access to the website's content or registrant details, no definitive conclusions about the business or its operations can be drawn. From a technical perspective, the lack of accessible content means no information about the technology stack, hosting provider, or security headers can be determined. The absence of privacy, cookie, or security policies also indicates a lack of transparency and compliance readiness. The security posture is unknown but likely weak given the lack of accessible data and absence of visible security best practices. Overall, the site presents a high risk due to inaccessibility and lack of verifiable information. It is recommended to resolve the rate limiting or WAF issues to allow proper access and analysis. Additionally, publishing clear WHOIS data, security policies, and contact information would improve trust and compliance. Until these issues are addressed, the website should be treated with caution.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
15/ 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

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 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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching tsb.cz

This scan found 19 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
95
Security headers
60
Email security
80
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
15
Average
73

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 unavailability of website content and WHOIS data, no meaningful business intelligence can be extracted. The domain appears to be either protected by privacy services or not properly registered, which is unusual for a legitimate business website. No information about market positioning, business model, revenue streams, or partnerships is available. The lack of accessible content and contact details suggests the website is either under maintenance, misconfigured, or intentionally restricted, limiting any competitive or operational insights.

Security posture

The security posture cannot be fully assessed due to the website's inaccessibility. The HTTP 429 error indicates rate limiting or WAF protection, but no specific security headers or SSL configuration details are available. The absence of published security policies, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms points to a low maturity level in security governance. The lack of WHOIS data further reduces trust and raises concerns about transparency. Overall, the site currently exhibits a weak security posture with significant gaps in compliance and incident readiness.

Recommendations

  1. Resolve the HTTP 429 Too Many Requests error to restore website accessibility for users and automated analysis.
  2. Ensure HTTPS is properly configured and security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security are implemented.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy, cookie, and security policies to demonstrate compliance with GDPR and other regulations.
  4. Provide clear contact information including security incident response and data protection officer contacts.
  5. Review WHOIS registration details to ensure transparency and legitimacy of domain ownership.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. Website returns HTTP 429 Too Many Requests error with minimal HTML content indicating rate limiting or WAF blocking. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor

Technology

Analytics and tracking

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website content is inaccessible due to HTTP 429 Too Many Requests error.
  2. No metadata, forms, scripts, or business content available for analysis.
  3. No contact information, policies, or security disclosures found.
  4. WHOIS data is unavailable, indicating privacy protection or unregistered domain.
  5. Security posture cannot be assessed due to lack of accessible content.
  6. Website appears to be blocked or rate limited, preventing meaningful analysis.
Technical notes

Notes

The technical analysis is limited due to the lack of accessible website content. No metadata, scripts, or technology indicators were found in the minimal HTML response. The presence of an HTTP 429 error suggests the site is protected by rate limiting or a generic WAF, but the specific technology or hosting provider cannot be identified. No CMS or frameworks are detectable. Performance, mobile optimization, accessibility, and SEO cannot be evaluated. The site requires remediation to allow proper technical assessment and to identify modernization or security risks.
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 tsb.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 tsb.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.