Skip to main content

Security report for type01studio.com

Type01 Studio · Other · United Kingdom

High risk. 8 critical or high findings in Network security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

49/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Type01 Studio is a UK-based creative design studio specializing in typography and brand identity services. Their offerings include custom typeface design, font licensing consultations, graphic identity design, and motion design, targeting brands seeking clarity and impactful design solutions. The website presents a professional image with notable clients such as Glassdoor and Riot Games, positioning the company as a niche player in the creative design market. Technically, the site uses a minimal tech stack centered around jQuery 3.6.0 and demonstrates good mobile optimization and user experience, though lacks advanced SEO and accessibility features. Security posture is moderate with no visible security headers or incident response information, and privacy compliance is weak due to absence of privacy and cookie policies. Overall, the site is safe, trustworthy, and professionally maintained but would benefit from enhanced security and compliance measures.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 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

8 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL 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

  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';…

  3. 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

    • 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

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

Keep watching type01studio.com

This scan found 25 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
55
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
35
Average
52
After the cap
49

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 company operates as a small, specialized design studio focused on typography and brand identity, serving a clientele that includes prominent companies. Their business model revolves around bespoke design services and font production, with revenue likely generated through project-based contracts and licensing. The website reflects a consistent brand identity and professional presentation, supporting their market positioning. The absence of extensive marketing or analytics tools suggests a focus on organic or direct client acquisition. No parent or subsidiary companies are indicated, and the company appears to maintain transparent business information including VAT registration. Strategic partnerships or related domains are not evident from the data.

Security posture

The security maturity level is basic to moderate. The website uses HTTPS (assumed but not explicitly confirmed), but lacks important security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options. No forms or inputs are present that could expose vulnerabilities, and no sensitive data is exposed in the HTML. There is no published security policy, incident response contact, or vulnerability disclosure mechanism, which limits transparency and readiness for security incidents. GDPR compliance is not clearly addressed, and no cookie consent mechanism is implemented. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a small design studio but could be significantly improved to reduce risk and enhance trust.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy to improve privacy compliance and user trust.
  2. Implement security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Add a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Include incident response contact information, such as a security@ or abuse@ email address, to improve transparency and readiness.
  5. Conduct a security audit to verify SSL/TLS configuration and ensure HTTPS is enforced site-wide.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Type01 Studio
VAT number
GB352372509
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Type01 Studio
Description
Operating between the intersection of typography and creative strategy, we're a design studio that delivers clarity and lasting impact for brands.
Key services
Brand Identity Design, Custom Typeface Design & Font Production, Font Licensing Consultations, Graphic Identity Design, Strategy, Digital & Print, Motion Design
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery 3.6.0
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
60/100
Good practices seen
  • No forms with sensitive inputs detected
  • No exposed credentials or sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. No privacy or cookie policies found on the site
  2. Contact information limited to email only, no phone or physical address explicitly stated except in footer
  3. No forms present on the site for data collection
  4. Social media presence includes Instagram, Behance, and LinkedIn
  5. Website uses jQuery 3.6.0 from Google CDN
  6. No security headers or SSL configuration details provided
  7. No analytics or tracking scripts detected
  8. No advertising or marketing tools detected
  9. Content is professionally presented and relevant to the business
  10. No signs of adult or questionable content
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with a simple technology stack, primarily using jQuery 3.6.0 loaded from Google's CDN. There is no evidence of a CMS or complex frameworks. The site is moderately performant with good mobile optimization and basic accessibility features. SEO optimization is basic, with meta description and keywords present but no advanced structured data or Open Graph tags. The site lacks analytics or tracking scripts, indicating minimal user tracking. The absence of security headers and privacy policies suggests technical debt in security and compliance areas. The site structure and scripts are clean and functional, but modernization opportunities exist, especially in adopting modern JavaScript frameworks and improving accessibility and 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

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with type01studio.com. 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 type01studio.com.

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.