Skip to main content

Security report for tvprofil.net

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

64/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website tvprofil.com is currently inaccessible due to IP blocking triggered by high request volume from the region, as indicated by the block message in the HTML content. This prevents access to any meaningful content or business information. The domain is registered since 2007 with OnlineNIC, Inc., showing a long-standing registration but lacks DNSSEC and public registrant details. The site uses Ezoic for ad serving and Google Analytics for tracking, but no privacy or cookie policies are found, indicating poor compliance with privacy regulations. The security posture cannot be fully assessed due to lack of accessible content and missing security headers information. Overall, the site appears to have minimal transparency and poor user experience due to blocking and lack of visible content.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
65/ 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

7 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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';…

  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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

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

Keep watching tvprofil.net

This scan found 24 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
52
Security headers
20
Email security
65
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
65
Average
64

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 blocked content, no direct business intelligence can be extracted. The domain age suggests an established presence, but no company name, description, or contact details are available. The use of Ezoic and Google Analytics suggests a monetized content platform, likely media or entertainment related, but this cannot be confirmed. No partnerships or subsidiaries are identified. The lack of visible policies and contact info limits trust and credibility.

Security posture

The security posture is weak or unknown due to lack of accessible content and missing security headers. The domain uses HTTPS (implied by modern standards and Ezoic usage), but DNSSEC is not enabled. The presence of clientTransferProhibited status is positive. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is found. The site is protected by a WAF or server-side blocking mechanism that restricts access based on IP, which may protect against abuse but also limits legitimate access and analysis.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish clear privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and other regulations.
  2. Enable DNSSEC to improve DNS security and trustworthiness.
  3. Provide accessible contact information and business details to improve credibility.
  4. Review and adjust WAF or IP blocking rules to avoid blocking legitimate users and enable better accessibility.
  5. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance security posture.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. Website content is blocked due to high volume of requests from the region; IP range has been blocked. The HTML content shows a block message and consent management scripts but no actual site content. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (inferred from gtag)
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Ad networks
Ezoic, Google Adsense (inferred from adsbygoogle)
Transparency
basic

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 IP blocking by WAF or server-side restrictions.
  2. No visible privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found in the HTML content.
  3. No contact information or business details are present on the blocked page.
  4. Scripts indicate use of Ezoic ad platform and Google Analytics tracking.
  5. Domain is old and registered with a reputable registrar but lacks DNSSEC.
  6. No security headers or SSL configuration details available from provided data.
  7. Content safety is rated safe due to lack of content and no adult material detected.
  8. Analysis is incomplete due to blocked content; many fields are unknown or not determinable.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses JavaScript and is hosted behind Ezoic's DNS and ad platform infrastructure. The HTML content is minimal and only contains a block message and consent management scripts. No CMS or frameworks are detected. The site lacks metadata, SEO tags, or structured data. Performance and accessibility cannot be assessed due to blocking. The technical stack is basic and lacks modern SEO and accessibility features.
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 tvprofil.net. 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 tvprofil.net.

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.