Skip to main content

Security report for wijzijnstaf.be

Wijzijnstaf · Non-profit · Belgium

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

50/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Wijzijnstaf is a Belgian non-profit organization founded in 2020 that provides personal support and guidance to people with disabilities to enable independent living. The website targets individuals seeking support, caregivers, and professionals in the Leuven region. The organization offers services such as begeleid wonen (guided living), mobile ambulant support, home guidance, and training sessions. The site is well-branded, consistent, and provides clear contact information and social media presence, indicating a trustworthy and community-focused entity. Technically, the website uses modern web technologies including HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, Google Maps API, and popular font/icon libraries. The site is mobile optimized and performs moderately well, though no CMS or advanced frameworks are detected. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enforced and cookie consent implemented, but lacks explicit security headers and has a misconfigured Facebook Pixel. Privacy compliance is basic with a privacy policy and cookie banner but no detailed GDPR statements or security policies. Overall, the site is professional and credible but could improve in security and privacy transparency.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 100 · Medium
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. 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 wijzijnstaf.be

This scan found 26 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
52
Security headers
20
Email security
60
DNS health
80
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
68
Average
50

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 organization operates in the non-profit sector focused on disability support services in Belgium. Its business model centers on providing personalized support and training to individuals and caregivers, likely funded through grants, donations, or public funding. The website's market position is regional and community-oriented, with partnerships indicated by logos of VAPH and Trede. The target customers include people with disabilities, their caregivers, and professionals in the social care sector. The presence of news updates and social media engagement suggests active community involvement and growth potential. The lack of complex e-commerce or commercial services aligns with the non-profit nature. The company maintains a clear and consistent brand identity and provides multiple channels for contact and engagement.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS, which is a critical security baseline. However, no security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HSTS, or X-Frame-Options were detected in the provided data, which could expose the site to certain web-based attacks. The Facebook Pixel is implemented with a placeholder ID, indicating incomplete or test configuration, which could lead to data leakage or tracking issues. No forms collecting sensitive data were found on the homepage, reducing immediate risk. The cookie consent banner is present, supporting privacy compliance. There is no public incident response or security policy information, which is a gap in transparency and preparedness. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be improved by implementing recommended headers, validating third-party scripts, and publishing security policies.

Recommendations

  1. Implement standard security headers including CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection to enhance web security.
  2. Correct or remove the Facebook Pixel placeholder ID to prevent potential data leakage or tracking errors.
  3. Enhance the privacy policy to explicitly address GDPR compliance and data protection practices.
  4. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and plugins for security and privacy compliance.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Wijzijnstaf
Description
Staf ondersteunt mensen met een beperking om zelfstandig te wonen met persoonlijke begeleiding en ondersteuning.
Key services
Begeleid wonen, Mobiele ambulante ondersteuning, Thuisbegeleiding, Vorming (training and education)
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, Google Maps API, FontAwesome, Typekit Fonts
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Cookie consent banner implemented

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel
Marketing tools
Facebook Pixel
Transparency
basic

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 challenges.
  2. Content is in Dutch (nl) and targeted at Belgian audience.
  3. Clear cookie consent mechanism present.
  4. No explicit privacy or security policies beyond basic privacy and cookie notices.
  5. Use of Facebook Pixel with placeholder ID indicates possible incomplete marketing setup.
  6. Contact information is clearly presented with email, phone, and physical address.
  7. No visible forms collecting personal data on the homepage.
  8. Social media presence on Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram.
  9. No JSON-LD structured data detected.
  10. No explicit security headers found in provided data.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using standard web technologies with no detected CMS, suggesting a custom or static site architecture. It uses external font services (Typekit) and icon libraries (FontAwesome). Google Maps API is integrated but not actively used on the homepage. Performance is moderate with asynchronous loading of scripts and a cookie consent mechanism. Mobile optimization is good with responsive design elements. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and Open Graph data. Accessibility is basic but could be improved with ARIA roles and better semantic markup. Hosting is through Unix-Solutions BV, consistent with the domain registrar. There is no evidence of technical debt or outdated libraries, but security headers and advanced frameworks are missing, representing modernization opportunities.
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 wijzijnstaf.be. 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 wijzijnstaf.be.

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.