Skip to main content

Security report for whow.net

Whow Games GmbH · Technology · Germany

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

70/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Whow Games GmbH is a Hamburg-based developer and publisher specializing in free-to-play social casino games. Since 2015, the company has built a growing platform serving millions of users across web and mobile platforms in Europe. Their business model centers on engaging social gaming experiences with optional virtual chip purchases, without real money payouts. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand presence with active social media channels and job listings indicating a medium-sized enterprise. Technically, the site uses modern frameworks like Bootstrap and integrates cookie consent and bot protection mechanisms, though some security best practices such as explicit security headers and policies are missing. The absence of WHOIS data for the domain raises some concerns about domain registration legitimacy, but the overall digital footprint suggests a legitimate business. Privacy compliance is partially addressed via cookie consent, but no dedicated privacy or terms pages were found. Overall, the site is well-designed and functional with room for improvement in security transparency and compliance documentation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 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

4 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. 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 whow.net

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
67
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
Average
70

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention whow.net, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for whow.net right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

Monitor on Breach (opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Whow Games operates in the technology sector focusing on social gaming, targeting European social casino players. Their competitive advantage lies in a free-to-play model with engaging social features and multi-platform availability. Revenue streams likely include in-app purchases of virtual chips and affiliate partnerships. The company maintains partnerships with known brands like Jackpot.de and Merkur24.com, enhancing market reach. Growth indicators include active recruitment and a growing user base. The company emphasizes a fun, social experience over real money gambling, aligning with regulatory frameworks in Europe. Strategic observations suggest potential to expand compliance transparency and security posture to strengthen trust and market position.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS usage and integration of cookie consent and Google reCAPTCHA for bot mitigation. However, the lack of visible security headers, absence of a published security policy or incident response contacts, and no vulnerability disclosure mechanism indicate gaps in security transparency and readiness. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the provided content. Compliance with GDPR is partially evidenced by cookie consent but lacks comprehensive privacy documentation. The missing WHOIS data for the domain is a notable risk factor. Overall, the security posture is functional but would benefit from enhanced policies, disclosures, and technical hardening.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service pages.
  2. Add HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency.
  4. Establish a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  5. Verify and update domain WHOIS information to ensure registration legitimacy and trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Whow Games GmbH
Description
WHOW Games is a leading developer and publisher of online free-to-play social games based in Hamburg, Germany, operating since 2015. They offer a social gaming platform serving millions of users with free-to-play casino-style games.
Key services
Development and publishing of free-to-play social casino games, Multi-platform gaming (web and mobile), Affiliate program
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap, jQuery, OneTrust Cookie Consent, Google reCAPTCHA
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Platforms
Web, Mobile
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of HTTPS (implied by canonical link https://www.whow.net)
  • Cookie consent banner with OneTrust
  • Google reCAPTCHA script loaded

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Google reCAPTCHA
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and content-rich.
  2. No WHOIS data available, which is unusual and requires further verification.
  3. Cookie consent and GDPR compliance mechanisms are implemented.
  4. No explicit security policies or incident response information found.
  5. Social media presence on Facebook and LinkedIn is active.
  6. Job listings indicate a medium-sized company based in Hamburg, Germany.
  7. No visible contact phone numbers or physical addresses on the main page.
  8. No terms of service or privacy policy pages explicitly linked or found in the HTML content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern tech stack including Bootstrap for responsive design, jQuery for interactivity, and OneTrust for cookie consent management. Google reCAPTCHA is integrated for bot protection. The site is mobile optimized with good navigation and SEO meta tags. Performance is moderate with no major issues detected. No CMS was identified, suggesting a custom or static site approach. Hosting provider details are not evident. Accessibility features are basic and could be improved. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports the business needs but could benefit from enhanced security configurations and accessibility improvements.
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 whow.net. 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 whow.net.

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.