Skip to main content

Security report for vob.se

Other · N/a

High risk. 9 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

45/100

Risk levelHigh

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

The website vob.se is currently inaccessible beyond a security challenge page that performs browser integrity checks and automatic redirects, indicating the presence of a Web Application Firewall or similar security mechanism. The visible metadata suggests the site is built on outdated CMS platforms, Joomla 1.5 and WordPress 2.5, which are no longer supported and pose significant security risks. No business, contact, or compliance information is directly accessible, limiting the ability to assess the company's market position or operational details. Technically, the site lacks modern security headers, HTTPS enforcement, and privacy or cookie policies, which are critical for trust and compliance in today's web environment. Overall, the site exhibits poor content quality, minimal technical sophistication, and a low security posture, compounded by the blocking security layer that prevents deeper analysis.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 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

9 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

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

  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

  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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

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

Keep watching vob.se

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
0
Security headers
20
Email security
80
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
Average
45

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 security challenge page blocking access, no concrete business intelligence data such as company name, sector, size, or market positioning could be extracted. The presence of outdated CMS versions suggests the site may be legacy or poorly maintained. The only external link is to BitNinja.IO, a security service provider, indicating some level of security awareness or protection. No contact details or trust indicators are present, which negatively impacts business credibility and user trust.

Security posture

The security posture is weak, primarily due to the use of obsolete CMS versions known for vulnerabilities, absence of HTTPS enforcement in the provided content, and lack of security headers. The site employs a generic security challenge mechanism that blocks direct access, which is a positive defensive measure but also limits transparency. No privacy or cookie policies are present, and no incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is available. Overall, the site is at risk of exploitation if the WAF is bypassed, and it lacks modern security best practices.

Recommendations

  1. Upgrade all CMS platforms to current supported versions to mitigate known vulnerabilities.
  2. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate and enforce secure connections site-wide.
  3. Add comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and other regulations.
  4. Publish clear contact information and security incident response contacts to improve trust and compliance.
  5. Enhance security headers and perform regular security audits to identify and remediate vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. Page is a security challenge page with automatic redirect and browser integrity check, indicating WAF or security protection blocking direct content access. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Description
Joomla!
Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Stack
Joomla 1.5, WordPress 2.5
Performance
slow
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
30/100
Good practices seen
  • JavaScript browser integrity check
  • Automatic redirect with countdown

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website content is blocked behind a security challenge page.
  2. No direct access to business or contact information.
  3. Outdated CMS versions indicated in metadata.
  4. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  5. Only external link is to BitNinja.IO, a security service provider.
  6. No visible contact emails, phone numbers, or social media links.
  7. Page uses JavaScript to perform browser integrity checks and automatic form submission for redirect.
  8. No SEO or accessibility optimizations detected.
  9. No security headers or HTTPS enforcement visible in provided data.
Technical notes

Notes

The site uses legacy CMS technologies (Joomla 1.5 and WordPress 2.5) which are outdated and unsupported, posing significant security and maintenance risks. The HTML content is minimal and primarily serves as a security challenge page with JavaScript-based browser integrity checks and automatic form submission for redirect. No modern frameworks or analytics tools are detected. The site shows basic mobile optimization but lacks SEO and accessibility features. Performance is likely slow due to outdated technology and lack of optimization. Hosting provider details are not available. Overall, the technical infrastructure requires modernization to meet current web standards and security requirements.
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 vob.se. 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 vob.se.

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.