Skip to main content

Security report for unigra.nl

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

57/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website www.unigra.nl is a small business site built on the Wix platform, utilizing Wix Thunderbolt framework and standard JavaScript polyfills. The site content is minimal and primarily technical, with no visible business descriptions, contact information, or privacy-related policies in the provided HTML content. The technical infrastructure is modern but lacks advanced SEO, accessibility, and security headers. The security posture is basic with HTTPS implied but missing explicit security headers and privacy compliance mechanisms. Overall, the site appears legitimate but lacks transparency and comprehensive business and security information, which limits trust and compliance confidence.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
10/ 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

8 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

  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';…

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

Keep watching unigra.nl

This scan found 29 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
70
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
10
Average
57

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 absence of explicit business content, contact details, or structured data, the market positioning, business model, and target audience cannot be confidently determined. The site appears to be a small-scale business presence with limited digital maturity and no visible partnerships or certifications. The lack of privacy and cookie policies suggests limited compliance focus. The business intelligence is minimal and indicates a need for improved online presence and transparency.

Security posture

The security maturity level is low to moderate. HTTPS is used, but no security headers like CSP, HSTS, or X-Frame-Options are detected. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is available. Cookie handling scripts show some security awareness but no consent mechanisms are present. The site lacks privacy and cookie policies, which is a compliance gap under GDPR. No exposed sensitive data or known vulnerabilities are visible in the provided content, but the absence of security best practices reduces the overall security posture.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy with consent mechanisms to improve GDPR compliance.
  2. Add clear contact information including emails and phone numbers for customer and security incident reporting.
  3. Configure and deploy essential security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options.
  4. Enhance SEO and accessibility features including meta tags, alt attributes, and ARIA roles to improve user experience and search ranking.
  5. Establish an incident response process and publish vulnerability disclosure or security.txt information to build 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
Frameworks
Wix Thunderbolt
Platforms
Wix.com
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
40/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of HTTPS (implied by URL https://)
  • Cookie handling with some security restrictions

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is built on Wix platform with standard Wix scripts and assets.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found in the provided content.
  3. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses detected.
  4. No social media links or external business-related links found.
  5. No security or incident response information available.
  6. Content is minimal and mostly technical scripts and styles; no visible business content in provided HTML snippet.
  7. No SEO or accessibility meta tags detected.
  8. No analytics or marketing tools detected in the provided scripts.
  9. No signs of adult or questionable content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses Wix CMS and hosting, leveraging Wix Thunderbolt framework and standard JavaScript polyfills for compatibility. The site loads assets from Wix static domains and uses modern web technologies but lacks advanced SEO and accessibility optimizations. Performance is moderate given the Wix platform constraints. The site is mobile optimized at a basic level but could improve responsiveness and navigation clarity. No analytics or marketing tools are detected, indicating minimal tracking or data collection. Technical debt appears low but the site would benefit from modernization in SEO, security, and privacy implementations.
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 unigra.nl. 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 unigra.nl.

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.