Skip to main content

Security report for whgood.co.uk

W H Good Group · Manufacturing · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

63/100

Risk levelMedium

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

W H Good Group is a well-established UK-based engineering and construction company specializing in providing engineering products and services to process, construction, and manufacturing industries. Their website reflects a professional B2B service provider with a broad portfolio including industrial/process mechanical and electrical services, building services engineering, instrumentation, and integrated automation solutions. The company emphasizes long-standing industry experience and customer-focused partnerships. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with modern plugins for SEO, analytics, and GDPR compliance, demonstrating a reasonable level of digital maturity. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enforced and cookie consent mechanisms in place, though formal security policies and incident response contacts are not published. The absence of WHOIS data due to domain registration issues introduces some uncertainty about domain legitimacy, but the website content and business presentation are consistent with a credible enterprise. Overall, the site is well-structured, user-friendly, and compliant with privacy regulations, supporting the company's professional image.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
80/ 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. 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"

    • 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. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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

  3. 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

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

Keep watching whgood.co.uk

This scan found 27 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
47
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
80
Average
63

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 operates in the manufacturing and construction sectors, targeting industrial and commercial clients requiring engineering and automation services. Their business model is service-oriented, focusing on project management, engineering, and facilities support. The website indicates a medium-sized enterprise with over a century of operational history, suggesting market stability and experience. The presence of social media channels like LinkedIn and YouTube supports brand visibility and client engagement. The company maintains a comprehensive legal framework on their site, including privacy, cookie, and terms policies, indicating regulatory awareness. However, the lack of direct contact emails or phone numbers on the homepage may limit immediate client outreach. No evidence of partnerships or subsidiaries was found, suggesting a focused operational structure.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses cookie consent management, reflecting compliance with GDPR and basic security best practices. Google Analytics is integrated with user consent, indicating privacy-conscious data collection. However, the absence of security headers and a published security policy or incident response plan limits transparency and preparedness. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the content. The WHOIS data anomaly raises a minor concern but does not directly impact website security. Recommendations include implementing security headers, publishing a security policy, and providing incident response contact details to enhance trust and readiness.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a formal security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
  2. Implement HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Regularly review and update third-party scripts and plugins to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  4. Consider adding direct company contact emails and phone numbers for improved client communication.
  5. Investigate and resolve the domain WHOIS registration issue to improve domain legitimacy and trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
W H Good Group
Description
Specialists in the provision of engineering products and services to process, construction and manufacturing industries.
Key services
Industrial / Process Mechanical & Electrical, Interior / Exterior Build, Building Services Engineering, Instrumentation Services, Integrated Automation & Process Solutions
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Google Analytics, ExactMetrics plugin, Yoast SEO plugin, jQuery, FlexSlider, Complianz GDPR plugin
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented
  • Google Analytics with consent management

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Marketing tools
ExactMetrics
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenge
  2. Professional business website for an engineering and construction group
  3. Comprehensive legal and privacy documentation present
  4. Use of modern CMS and analytics with consent management
  5. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on homepage; contact form present
  6. WHOIS data unavailable due to domain registration error
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS, utilizing plugins such as Yoast SEO for search engine optimization, ExactMetrics for Google Analytics integration, and Complianz for GDPR cookie consent management. The front-end uses jQuery and FlexSlider for interactive elements. The site loads CSS and JS resources efficiently with caching and minification. Mobile optimization is good, with responsive design and accessible navigation menus. Performance is moderate, with no major blocking scripts detected. Accessibility features are basic but present. The technical stack is modern and appropriate for a medium-sized business website, though opportunities exist to enhance security headers and accessibility 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 whgood.co.uk. 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 whgood.co.uk.

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.