Skip to main content

Security report for versiontwo.co.uk

Version Two · Technology · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

65/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Version Two is a UK-based technology company specializing in event management software, primarily through its Evessio platform. The company targets event managers and organizers, offering bespoke solutions for awards, exhibitions, and conferences. Their market position is that of an innovative niche player emphasizing agility and continuous innovation. The website is professionally designed, with consistent branding and clear business messaging. Technically, the site uses modern JavaScript libraries, Google Analytics, and reCAPTCHA for bot protection, hosted partially on Amazon S3. Security posture is good with HTTPS and CSRF tokens, but lacks explicit security headers and published security policies. Privacy compliance is basic, with a privacy policy present but no cookie consent mechanism despite tracking scripts. Overall, the site is trustworthy and well-maintained, though improvements in security transparency and privacy compliance are recommended.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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

6 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

  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';…
  3. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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 versiontwo.co.uk

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. 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
40
Email security
60
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
65

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention versiontwo.co.uk, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for versiontwo.co.uk right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

Monitor on Breach (opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Version Two operates a SaaS business model focused on event management software, leveraging its Evessio platform. The company appears small but established since 2014, with a clear focus on innovation and agility. Their competitive advantage lies in a bespoke, continuously evolving platform tailored for event professionals. The business invites investment and collaboration, indicating growth ambitions. The partnership with Evessio.com is central to their offering. Revenue streams likely include software subscriptions and custom development. The company maintains a professional online presence with clear calls to action for contact and engagement.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security maturity level. HTTPS is enforced, and Google reCAPTCHA is used to mitigate automated abuse. A CSRF token is present, indicating attention to form security. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options reduces defense-in-depth. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is published, which could hinder transparency and trust. Privacy compliance is partial, lacking cookie consent mechanisms despite tracking technologies. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the provided content. Overall, the security posture is adequate but could be enhanced with better header policies and published security documentation.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive security policy including incident response procedures.
  2. Add and enforce security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Introduce a cookie consent banner/mechanism to comply with GDPR and improve privacy compliance.
  4. Publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to enhance transparency and trust.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and libraries to ensure no vulnerabilities are introduced.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Version Two
Description
Version Two provides the highly regarded evessio.com events management platform. They offer innovative software solutions for awards, exhibitions, and conferences, emphasizing agility, innovation, and leveraging existing work to accelerate projects. They invite investment opportunities and provide a bespoke software platform called Evessio.
Key services
Evessio events management platform, Bespoke software solutions for awards, exhibitions, and conferences
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Google reCAPTCHA, FontAwesome, Tus-js-client
Platforms
Evessio platform
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA for bot protection
  • CSRF token present in meta tag

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
DataDome
Transparency
basic

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. Content is focused on event management software and related services.
  3. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on the homepage; contact is via form.
  4. Privacy policy and terms are present but basic.
  5. No cookie consent mechanism detected despite use of tracking scripts.
  6. Security headers are not explicitly visible in the HTML content.
  7. Use of modern JavaScript libraries and Google services for analytics and bot protection.
  8. Branding and design are consistent and professional.
  9. No explicit security or incident response policies published.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a custom or proprietary CMS/platform (Evessio) with static assets hosted on Amazon S3. It employs modern JavaScript libraries including FontAwesome, Tus-js-client for file uploads, and Google services for analytics and bot protection. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and good SEO meta tags. Performance is moderate, likely influenced by multiple external scripts and assets. Accessibility is basic but could be improved. No major technical debt or outdated technologies were detected. Opportunities exist to enhance security headers and privacy mechanisms to align with best practices.
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 versiontwo.co.uk. 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 versiontwo.co.uk.

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.