Skip to main content

Security report for urw.com

Unibail-Rodamco-Westfield · Real Estate · France

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

56/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Unibail-Rodamco-Westfield is a leading global real estate company specializing in the ownership, development, and operation of sustainable retail, office, and lifestyle destinations across Europe and the United States. The company operates a significant portfolio of 67 shopping centers in 11 countries, positioning itself as a mature and enterprise-level player in the real estate sector. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand image, emphasizing sustainability and high-quality assets. Technically, the site leverages modern web technologies including React and Next.js, hosted on Google Frontend with Contentful as the CMS, ensuring a good digital maturity level. However, the security posture is weakened by the absence of a valid SSL certificate and lack of modern TLS protocol support, which are critical for secure communications. Despite strong security headers and good privacy policy presence, the invalid SSL significantly impacts the overall security score. The domain registration is mature, consistent, and transparent, supporting the legitimacy of the business. Strategic recommendations include immediate remediation of SSL issues, implementation of cookie consent mechanisms, and enhancement of security best practices to improve trust and compliance.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of urw.com. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
18/ 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

4 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

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

    • 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. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

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

Keep watching urw.com

This scan found 13 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
0
Security headers
85
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
18
Average
56

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

The company holds a strong market position as a major real estate owner and operator with a focus on sustainable and high-quality assets. Its business model centers on retail and office property management, targeting investors, tenants, and partners. The extensive portfolio and global footprint indicate robust revenue streams and growth potential. The website content and structure support investor relations and corporate communications effectively. Partnerships with technology providers like Contentful and cloud hosting on Google demonstrate a modern infrastructure. The company’s emphasis on sustainability and CSR initiatives aligns with current market trends and regulatory expectations, enhancing its competitive advantage.

Security posture

The website demonstrates awareness of security best practices through the use of multiple security headers such as HSTS, CSP, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-XSS-Protection. However, the lack of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols represent critical vulnerabilities that expose users to potential interception and undermine trust. The absence of OCSP stapling and session resumption further limits security and performance. No evidence of vulnerability disclosure or incident response policies was found, indicating potential gaps in security governance. Overall, the security posture is moderate but requires urgent improvements in SSL/TLS configuration to meet industry standards and regulatory compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS and secure user connections.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3) and disable deprecated protocols to enhance security.
  3. Implement OCSP stapling and session resumption to improve certificate validation and performance.
  4. Add a cookie consent banner and mechanism to comply with privacy regulations and improve user transparency.
  5. Develop and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy and incident response plan to strengthen security governance.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern web technologies including React and Next.js, with Contentful as the CMS, hosted on Google Frontend infrastructure. The site uses SVG graphics and embedded video content for rich media presentation. Preloading of images and scripts indicates performance optimization efforts, though no explicit performance metrics were available. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and accessibility features. SEO is supported by comprehensive meta tags, Open Graph data, and JSON-LD structured data. However, the invalid SSL certificate and lack of HTTPS reduce overall technical robustness. The site does not expose forms on the homepage, minimizing data collection risks. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern and well-implemented but requires security enhancements.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 79/100Low26 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with urw.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 urw.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.