Skip to main content

Security report for webnia.cloud

WEBNIA s.r.o. · Technology · Czech Republic

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

Security score

66/100

Risk levelMedium

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

WEBNIA s.r.o. is a Czech-based technology service provider specializing in custom web development, e-commerce solutions, graphic design, and printing services. The company positions itself as a quality-focused partner for businesses seeking tailored digital solutions, emphasizing functional, responsive, and visually appealing websites and e-shops. Their market presence is supported by a portfolio of client references and positive Google reviews, indicating a trusted regional player in their sector. Technically, the website employs modern web technologies including Google Fonts, Font Awesome, Google Maps API, and analytics/tracking tools such as Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, and Smartlook. The site is mobile-optimized and demonstrates good SEO and accessibility practices. Security-wise, the site enforces HTTPS and implements cookie consent mechanisms with granular controls, but lacks visible HTTP security headers and formal security policy documentation. The absence of WHOIS data limits domain trust verification, though the website content and business information appear professional and credible. Overall, the site scores well on content quality, technical implementation, and privacy compliance, with room for improvement in security posture and domain transparency.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 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 Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  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 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 webnia.cloud

This scan found 20 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
65
Security headers
35
Email security
85
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
66

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

WEBNIA operates in the technology sector, targeting businesses requiring custom web and e-commerce solutions. Their business model is service-oriented, delivering end-to-end digital projects including web design, development, graphic services, and printing. The company leverages client testimonials and a diverse portfolio to establish credibility. Their use of multiple analytics and marketing tools suggests a focus on performance and customer engagement. The company maintains active contact channels and GDPR-compliant privacy practices, which are critical for client trust. However, the lack of publicly available domain registration data could be a competitive disadvantage or a risk factor. The company appears to maintain partnerships with various clients across industries, enhancing its market reach and reputation.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security posture with mandatory HTTPS usage and cookie consent mechanisms aligned with GDPR. Client-side and server-side form validations are implemented, reducing input-related risks. However, the absence of explicit HTTP security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HSTS, and X-Frame-Options is a notable gap that could expose the site to certain web-based attacks. No security.txt or incident response information is published, which limits transparency and preparedness for vulnerability disclosures. The use of third-party tracking and marketing scripts introduces potential privacy and security considerations that require ongoing monitoring. Overall, the security maturity is adequate for a small technology service provider but could be enhanced with additional hardening and policy disclosures.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTP security headers including Content Security Policy, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection to strengthen defense against common web attacks.
  2. Publish a security.txt file and a formal security policy to improve transparency and facilitate vulnerability reporting.
  3. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and tracking tools to mitigate risks from external dependencies.
  4. Enhance WHOIS domain registration transparency to improve trustworthiness and domain legitimacy perception.
  5. Maintain and document incident response procedures and data protection officer contact information to align with best compliance practices.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
WEBNIA s.r.o.
Description
Tvoří webové stránky a e-shopy na míru s garancí kvality, zajišťují také grafiku a tisk.
Key services
Tvorba webových stránek, Tvorba internetových obchodů, Tvorba firemních systémů a aplikací, Grafické služby a DTP design, Tisk, Výkonnostní online marketing
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Fonts, Font Awesome, Google Maps API, Smartlook, Facebook Pixel, Google Tag Manager
Frameworks
Nette Framework
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent with granular controls
  • Form validation with client-side and server-side rules
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Ads, Facebook Pixel, Smartlook
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Google Ads, Facebook Pixel, Smartlook
Marketing tools
Smartlook, Facebook Pixel
Transparency
good

Site quality

Design
excellent
User experience
excellent
Content relevance
excellent
Navigation
excellent
Professionalism
excellent
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and no blocking detected.
  2. WHOIS data is missing, which limits domain trust verification.
  3. Comprehensive cookie consent and privacy policy present, indicating GDPR compliance.
  4. Multiple contact methods including email, phone, and forms are available and clearly labeled.
  5. Use of modern web technologies and analytics tools is evident.
  6. No security.txt or explicit security policy documents found.
  7. No exposed sensitive data or obvious vulnerabilities detected in HTML content.
  8. Strong branding and client references enhance trust.
  9. No social media links explicitly found in the HTML content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern technology stack with Google Fonts, Font Awesome icons, Google Maps API, and analytics/tracking tools such as Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, and Smartlook. The presence of Nette Framework is inferred from form validation attributes, indicating a PHP-based backend framework. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and good accessibility features. Performance is moderate, with no explicit indicators of slow loading but also no advanced performance optimizations detected. SEO is well addressed through meta tags and Open Graph data. No CMS is explicitly detected, suggesting a custom or framework-based solution. Hosting provider details are not available from the provided data. Overall, the technical implementation is solid with opportunities for performance tuning and security enhancements.
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 webnia.cloud. 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 webnia.cloud.

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.