Skip to main content

Security report for whizsolutions.co.uk

Other · United Kingdom

High risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

47/100

Risk levelHigh

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

The website whizsolutions.co.uk currently serves a security verification page employing Google Invisible reCAPTCHA, indicating the presence of a Web Application Firewall or bot protection mechanism. This prevents direct access to the actual website content, limiting the ability to analyze business details, policies, or contact information. The technical infrastructure includes modern frontend libraries such as Bootstrap 5.3.3 and Google reCAPTCHA, suggesting some level of digital maturity. However, the absence of HTTPS enforcement visible in the provided data and lack of security headers reduces the overall security posture. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies are present on the accessible page, and no contact or business information is disclosed. Overall, the site appears to be a small business or service with minimal public-facing content, currently protected by security measures that restrict content access.

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

8 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

      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"

    • 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 whizsolutions.co.uk

This scan found 23 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
15
Email security
75
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
47

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 verification page blocking content, no detailed business intelligence can be extracted. The domain uses a UK ccTLD consistent with a UK-based entity, but no company name, description, or contact details are available. The lack of visible business information and policies limits assessment of market positioning, business model, or partnerships. The site likely targets users requiring bot protection, but the exact audience and services remain unknown.

Security posture

The security posture shows use of Google Invisible reCAPTCHA to mitigate automated access, which is a positive control. However, the absence of HTTPS enforcement in the provided HTML content and lack of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options are weaknesses. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected, but the inability to access full content limits comprehensive security evaluation. Incident response and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are not visible. Overall, security maturity appears basic with room for improvement.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate to secure all traffic.
  2. Add standard security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Publish clear privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies accessible to users.
  4. Provide visible and verified contact information to improve business credibility and compliance.
  5. Enhance SEO and accessibility features to improve user experience and compliance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. Page is a security verification challenge using Google Invisible reCAPTCHA, indicating a WAF or bot protection mechanism blocking direct access to content. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap 5.3.3, Google reCAPTCHA v3
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
40/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA v3 for bot protection
  • Invisible reCAPTCHA integration

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 verification page using Google Invisible reCAPTCHA.
  2. No visible business or contact information on the landing page.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  4. No visible forms collecting user data except the reCAPTCHA token form.
  5. No social media or external business links present.
  6. Technical implementation uses modern Bootstrap and Google reCAPTCHA libraries.
  7. No SEO or accessibility meta tags detected.
  8. No security headers or HTTPS enforcement visible in provided data.
  9. Likely small business or service with minimal public-facing content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses Bootstrap 5.3.3 for styling and Google Invisible reCAPTCHA v3 for bot protection, indicating use of modern frontend technologies. The page is minimal, serving primarily as a security verification gateway. No CMS or backend technologies are detectable from the provided HTML. Performance is likely moderate given CDN usage for Bootstrap and Google scripts. Mobile optimization appears good due to responsive Bootstrap design. SEO and accessibility are minimal due to lack of meta tags and content. The site is hosted on an unknown provider with no visible hosting details.
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 whizsolutions.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 whizsolutions.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.