Skip to main content

Security report for vrm-anna.de

VRM Anna · Media · Germany

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Email security and 1 other check.

Security score

67/100

Risk levelMedium

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

VRM Anna operates as an online platform facilitating ad submission and management for newspapers and weekly papers primarily in the Rhein-Main and Mittelhessen regions of Germany. The service targets both private and business customers, offering features such as ad drafting, personal ad archives, and payment method storage. The website reflects a regional media service provider with a moderate digital presence and a focus on user convenience for ad bookings. Technically, the site employs modern frontend technologies like React and integrates Google Analytics and Tag Manager for tracking, alongside a GDPR-compliant cookie consent mechanism. However, the absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS support significantly undermines the site's security posture, exposing users to potential risks. No advanced security headers or DNS security features are implemented, and no explicit security or incident response policies are found. Overall, while the business model and content quality are solid, the technical and security implementations require urgent improvements to meet modern standards and build user trust.

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

7 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. 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

  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 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 vrm-anna.de

This scan found 19 issues across 5 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. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

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
100
Security headers
65
Email security
60
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
Average
67

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 positions itself as a regional media service provider specializing in ad management for print media in the Rhein-Main and Mittelhessen areas. Its business model revolves around providing an online interface for ad creation, archiving, and booking, targeting both private individuals and commercial clients. The presence of partner domains related to media sales and data protection indicates a collaborative ecosystem supporting its operations. The platform's moderate size and regional focus suggest a medium-sized enterprise with a niche market. The lack of social media presence and limited external marketing tools imply a conservative digital marketing approach. The company benefits from clear contact information and legal compliance links, enhancing credibility within its target market.

Security posture

The website's security posture is weak due to the lack of HTTPS and a valid SSL certificate, which is a critical vulnerability exposing all data transmissions to interception and tampering. The absence of security headers such as HSTS and DNSSEC further weakens domain and transport security. No security policy or incident response information is publicly available, indicating limited transparency and preparedness for security incidents. While no known vulnerabilities or malware are detected, the missing encryption and security controls represent significant risks to user data and trust. The cookie consent mechanism is properly implemented, reflecting compliance with privacy regulations, but overall security hygiene needs substantial enhancement.

Recommendations

  1. Install and maintain a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Implement security headers including HSTS, Content-Security-Policy, and X-Frame-Options to harden the site against common attacks.
  3. Configure DNSSEC and DMARC records to protect domain integrity and email security.
  4. Publish a clear security policy and incident response plan accessible to users and stakeholders.
  5. Optimize website performance by reducing page size and improving load times to enhance user experience.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern frontend technologies, likely React, with chunked CSS and JavaScript assets. It integrates Google Analytics and Tag Manager for user tracking and uses Consentmanager.net for GDPR-compliant cookie consent. Hosting is provided by Versatel, as indicated by the nameservers. Performance is moderate with a relatively large page size (~2.9MB) and load time around 4.9 seconds, suggesting room for optimization. Mobile optimization and accessibility are basic but functional. SEO is supported by meta tags and structured content but could be improved. The lack of HTTPS and security headers is a major technical deficiency. Overall, the infrastructure supports the business needs but requires modernization in security and performance aspects.
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 vrm-anna.de. 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 vrm-anna.de.

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.