Skip to main content

Security report for vicaragecourt.com

Vicarage Court Solicitors Limited · Real Estate · United Kingdom

High risk. 5 critical or high findings in Network security, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

49/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Vicarage Court Solicitors Limited is a small, specialized law firm based in Birmingham, UK, offering a range of legal services including residential conveyancing, commercial property, litigation, insolvency, and banking finance. The firm positions itself as a highly experienced team focused on delivering quality legal advice and personalized client service. The website reflects a professional image with clear service descriptions and contact information, targeting individuals and businesses in the Birmingham area. Technically, the website uses a modern front-end stack including Bootstrap and jQuery, with responsive design and basic SEO elements. However, there is no evidence of a CMS or advanced hosting details. The site includes a cookie consent mechanism and a privacy policy, indicating some attention to privacy compliance, though GDPR compliance is not fully evident. From a security perspective, the site lacks visible security headers and advanced protections such as CSP or HSTS. The contact form uses POST but the backend handling is unknown, posing potential risks. The absence of WHOIS registration data for the domain is a significant concern, impacting trust and legitimacy assessments. The presence of an SRA Digital Badge adds a trust signal related to regulatory compliance. Overall, the website is functional and professional but would benefit from enhanced security measures, clearer domain registration transparency, and expanded compliance documentation to improve trustworthiness and reduce risk.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 100 · Low
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

5 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
    • High

      High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

      Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

      What to do: Consider restricting access to FTP or implementing strong authentication

      • 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. 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.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

  3. 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 Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1
    • 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 vicaragecourt.com

This scan found 22 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
57
Security headers
45
Email security
85
DNS health
80
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
83
Average
58
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 firm operates in the legal sector with a focus on real estate and finance-related legal services. Its market position is that of a small, experienced boutique law firm emphasizing client satisfaction and value. The business model is service-oriented, targeting local individuals and businesses requiring specialized legal expertise. The partnership with Galaxy Marketing suggests an investment in digital marketing to enhance visibility. Growth indicators are not explicit, but the detailed team and service descriptions imply a stable operation. No parent or subsidiary companies are identified. The firm’s competitive advantage lies in its experienced directors and personalized approach.

Security posture

The current security posture is basic with some positive elements such as HTTPS assumed (though not confirmed in data), a cookie consent banner, and a secure contact form method. However, the lack of security headers, no visible incident response or security policy pages, and missing WHOIS domain registration data reduce the overall security maturity. There is no evidence of vulnerability disclosure or data protection officer contact information. The firm should prioritize implementing security headers, verifying SSL configuration, and publishing security and incident response policies to improve readiness and compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Verify and publish accurate WHOIS domain registration information to improve legitimacy and trust.
  2. Implement and enforce HTTPS with strong SSL/TLS configuration and regularly audit it.
  3. Add essential security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection.
  4. Develop and publish clear security policies including incident response and vulnerability disclosure procedures.
  5. Enhance GDPR compliance by expanding privacy policy details and ensuring cookie consent mechanisms meet regulatory standards.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Vicarage Court Solicitors Limited
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Vicarage Court Solicitors Limited
Description
Vicarage Court Solicitors Limited is a four Director Law firm based in Edgbaston, Birmingham. They provide legal services including residential conveyancing, commercial property, litigation, will writing, intellectual property, insolvency, banking finance, landlord & tenant disputes, personal and corporate litigation.
Key services
Residential Property, Litigation, Insolvency, Commercial Property, Banking & Finance
Content quality
good
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap, jQuery, Google Fonts, Swiper, Isotope, GLightbox, PHP (backend implied by form action)
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
55/100
Good practices seen
  • Contact form uses POST method
  • Cookie consent banner implemented

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible and contains full content with no blocking detected
  2. WHOIS data is missing or domain may not be registered
  3. Professional legal services website with clear contact information
  4. Cookie consent banner implemented indicating some privacy compliance effort
  5. No visible security headers or advanced security measures detected
  6. No social media links found
  7. External links mostly to marketing partner and fonts/scripts providers
  8. Contact form present with standard fields: name, email, subject, message
  9. SRA Digital Badge embedded indicating regulatory compliance
  10. No terms of service page found
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern front-end technology stack with Bootstrap, jQuery, and various UI libraries for responsiveness and interactivity. The site is mobile optimized with a clear navigation structure. However, there is no indication of a CMS or advanced backend platform. Performance is moderate with reliance on external CDNs for fonts and scripts. The contact form uses AJAX for submission but the backend endpoint is unspecified, which may pose security risks. Accessibility features are basic and could be improved. SEO is basic with meta tags present but no structured data or Open Graph tags detected.
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 vicaragecourt.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 vicaragecourt.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.