Skip to main content

Security report for wasterecyclingmag.com

Waste & Recycling · Media · N/a

Low risk. 2 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

78/100

Risk levelLow

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

Waste & Recycling is a regional media publication focused on the waste management and recycling industry, providing news, expert insights, multimedia content, and event information. The website demonstrates a moderate level of digital maturity with use of AMP, Bootstrap, and various analytics and marketing tools. However, the absence of WHOIS registration data raises concerns about domain legitimacy. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS and reCAPTCHA usage but lacks important security headers and visible privacy compliance. Overall, the site serves its target audience well but requires improvements in transparency and security to enhance trust.

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

2 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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';…

  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 SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching wasterecyclingmag.com

This scan found 18 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
75
Security headers
60
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
78

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 publication targets professionals and stakeholders in the waste and recycling sectors, offering specialized content and event promotion. Its business model revolves around media content and advertising partnerships. The site links to several partner event domains, indicating active industry engagement. However, lack of clear company contact details and privacy policies may hinder credibility. The use of multiple tracking and marketing tools suggests a focus on audience analytics and engagement.

Security posture

The website uses HTTPS and includes reCAPTCHA for form security, which are positive indicators. However, no security headers were detected in the provided data, and there is no visible incident response or security policy information. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates compliance gaps, especially regarding GDPR. The domain's WHOIS data is missing, which is a significant red flag for legitimacy and trust. Overall, the security posture is moderate but requires enhancements in policy transparency and technical controls.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms to improve compliance.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance protection.
  3. Provide clear and verified contact information including company emails and phone numbers for trust and incident response.
  4. Investigate and resolve the missing WHOIS registration data to ensure domain legitimacy and reduce suspicion.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking tools to minimize privacy risks and improve user trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Waste & Recycling
Description
Waste & Recycling is a magazine covering waste management, collection, hauling, disposal, recycling, composting, processing, incinerating, and waste-to-energy in the region.
Key services
Industry news and top stories, Expert talks and interviews, Multimedia content (webinars, podcasts, videos), Event promotion and coverage, Magazine publication and archives
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
AMP (Accelerated Mobile Pages), jQuery, Bootstrap 3.3.7, Slick Carousel, OneSignal Push Notifications, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, reCAPTCHA
Frameworks
AMP Framework, Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of reCAPTCHA for forms
  • Google Tag Manager and Analytics scripts loaded asynchronously

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, LinkedIn Insight
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
LinkedIn Insight
Marketing tools
OneSignal Push Notifications
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 fully functional with rich content.
  2. No WHOIS registration data found, indicating possible domain registration issues or privacy blocking.
  3. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the site.
  4. Use of multiple third-party analytics and marketing tools without visible privacy disclosures.
  5. No visible contact emails or phone numbers with clear company context.
  6. Good use of modern web technologies including AMP and Bootstrap.
  7. No security headers detected in provided data; opportunity for security improvements.
  8. Advertising banners present with tracking events for clicks and impressions.
  9. Social media presence is indicated but links are commented out or not fully visible in header.
  10. No evidence of adult or NSFW content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website leverages modern web technologies including AMP for mobile optimization, Bootstrap for responsive design, and jQuery for interactivity. It integrates Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, LinkedIn Insight, and OneSignal for analytics and marketing. Performance is moderate with asynchronous script loading. However, no CMS was explicitly detected, and hosting provider details are unavailable. Accessibility features are basic, and SEO optimization is good with proper meta tags. There is room for improvement in security headers and privacy compliance.
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 wasterecyclingmag.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 wasterecyclingmag.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.