Skip to main content

Security report for tvrdjava-kulture.hr

Tvrđava kulture Šibenik · Government · Croatia

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

Security score

53/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Tvrđava kulture Šibenik is a Croatian public cultural institution managing and revitalizing historic fortresses in Šibenik, including Sv. Mihovila, Barone, and Sv. Ivana. The organization focuses on cultural heritage preservation, visitor engagement, and hosting cultural events such as concerts. It maintains a strong partnership network with local sponsors and cultural organizations, enhancing its market position as a key cultural site in the region. The website targets tourists, local visitors, and cultural enthusiasts, providing information on visiting hours, events, and membership opportunities. Technically, the website employs modern web technologies including jQuery, Slick Carousel, Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, and cookie consent mechanisms. The site is mobile-optimized and includes accessibility features, contributing to a positive user experience. SEO and metadata are well implemented, supporting discoverability. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS and implements cookie consent, but lacks explicit security headers and a dedicated security policy or vulnerability disclosure page. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. The site integrates tracking and marketing tools responsibly with user consent. Overall, the website is professional, trustworthy, and compliant with privacy regulations, though it could improve security posture by adding security headers and formal policies. The domain registration aligns with the business identity, supporting legitimacy and trustworthiness.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 100 · Critical
Checks completed
6of 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. 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

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube, Cloudflare

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

  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 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 tvrdjava-kulture.hr

This scan found 25 issues across 5 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
44
Security headers
60
Email security
55
DNS health
80
GDPR outside view
25
Average
53

Not counted

  • Network security: did not complete in this scan.
  • 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 institution operates as a government or non-profit cultural entity, managing heritage sites and organizing cultural events. Its business model is service-oriented, focusing on cultural preservation and community engagement rather than commercial profit. Revenue streams likely include event ticket sales, space rentals, sponsorships, and membership fees. The organization has a medium size with a well-established local presence supported by multiple sponsors and partners. Its competitive advantage lies in managing unique historic sites and offering diverse cultural programming. The partnership ecosystem includes banks, insurance companies, cultural funds, and local tourism entities, indicating strong community integration and support.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and cookie consent implemented. However, it lacks advanced security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options, which are recommended to mitigate common web threats. No incident response or security contact information is provided, and no vulnerability disclosure mechanism is present. The use of third-party analytics and marketing tools is balanced with privacy compliance. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a cultural institution website but could be enhanced to reduce risk and improve trust.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive HTTP security headers including CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response contact information.
  3. Add a vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Conduct regular security audits and penetration testing to identify and mitigate risks.
  5. Enhance transparency on data retention policies and user privacy practices.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Tvrđava kulture Šibenik
Description
Tvrđava kulture Šibenik is a public cultural institution managing revitalized Šibenik fortresses Sv. Mihovila, Barone and Sv. Ivana.
Key services
Management of historical fortresses, Cultural events and concerts, Visitor information and tours, Space rental for events, Membership club (Klub prijatelja)
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Slick Carousel, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, CookieConsent.js
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of HTTPS (implied by external scripts loaded via https)
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented
  • No visible exposed sensitive data

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel
Marketing tools
Mailchimp (newsletter subscription)
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Cookie consent is implemented with clear messaging in Croatian.
  3. No explicit terms of service or security policy pages found.
  4. Contact information is clearly provided in footer with email and phone.
  5. Multiple official sponsors and partners are displayed, enhancing trust.
  6. Social media presence is strong with official accounts linked.
  7. Use of modern tracking and analytics tools with consent.
  8. Accessibility features are implemented with an accessibility panel.
  9. No visible forms collecting personal data except newsletter subscription via Mailchimp.
  10. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure found.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern and common technology stack with jQuery and Slick Carousel for UI components, and integrates Google Analytics and Facebook Pixel for analytics and marketing. Cookie consent is managed via a popular open-source library. The site is mobile responsive and includes accessibility features such as adjustable font size and contrast settings. Performance is moderate, with no major issues detected. No CMS or hosting provider information is explicitly found. The technical implementation is solid but could benefit from improved security configurations and performance optimizations.
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 tvrdjava-kulture.hr. 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 tvrdjava-kulture.hr.

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.