Skip to main content

Security report for wng.co

Webn Group · Finance · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Webn Group operates as an incubation hub specializing in fintech and Web3 innovation, focusing on bridging blockchain technology with institutional finance. The company supports and invests in a portfolio of companies that provide institutional-grade digital asset services and alternative investment access. Their target audience primarily includes institutional finance entities and fintech entrepreneurs seeking to build advanced Web3 businesses. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand presence with clear descriptions of their portfolio and services. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern JavaScript libraries and analytics tools, offering a moderate performance and good mobile optimization. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enforced and secure form handling, though lacking some security headers and explicit security policies. Privacy compliance is basic with visible cookie consent mechanisms and a privacy policy, but no terms of service or incident response information. Overall, the domain WHOIS data is redacted, which is common in this sector but limits transparency. The website is safe, professional, and credible with room for improvement in security and compliance documentation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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

6 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 Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

    • 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

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

Keep watching wng.co

This scan found 24 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
72
Security headers
30
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
68

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

Webn Group positions itself as a niche player in the fintech and Web3 incubation space, leveraging partnerships with entrepreneurs and engineers to build institutional-grade solutions. Their portfolio companies indicate a focus on staking, risk management, alternative investments, and cryptography-driven protocols. The business model centers on incubation and investment, targeting institutional clients and accredited investors. The website's content and structure suggest a small but focused organization with a clear market niche. The lack of direct contact emails or phone numbers may indicate a preference for controlled communication via contact forms. The partnership with Skylark Creative for site production suggests professional marketing support. Growth potential is tied to the expanding institutional interest in blockchain and digital assets.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses secure form handling with Gravity Forms including honeypot anti-spam measures. However, no explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options were detected, which could enhance protection against common web attacks. The absence of published security policies or incident response contacts limits transparency and preparedness perception. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found in the HTML content. The use of third-party scripts like Google Analytics and CookieYes is standard but requires ongoing monitoring for security risks. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be strengthened with additional headers, documented policies, and incident response readiness.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  2. Publish detailed security and incident response policies accessible from the website.
  3. Add terms of service and vulnerability disclosure policies to improve transparency and compliance.
  4. Enhance accessibility features to meet higher standards and improve user experience.
  5. Consider providing direct verified contact emails and phone numbers to increase business credibility.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Webn Group
Description
Webn Group is an incubation hub for fintech and Web3 innovation, building the bridge between blockchain technology and institutional finance by partnering with leading entrepreneurs, researchers and engineers.
Key services
Incubation hub, Investment in fintech and Web3 startups, Building institutional-grade fintech and Web3 businesses
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.8.1, jQuery, Gravity Forms, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, p5.js, Swiper.js, Jarallax, Magnific Popup
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of CAPTCHA in forms (Gravity Forms honeypot field)

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and content-rich
  2. WHOIS data is redacted, limiting domain ownership transparency
  3. No direct company contact emails or phone numbers found, only a contact form
  4. Privacy and cookie policies are present with consent mechanisms
  5. No terms of service or security incident response information available
  6. Use of modern web technologies and analytics tools
  7. No security headers detected in provided data
  8. No suspicious or malicious content detected
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 6.8.1 with a modern front-end stack including jQuery, Swiper.js, p5.js, and Jarallax for interactive and animated content. Gravity Forms is used for contact form management with AJAX and anti-spam features. Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager are integrated for user tracking and marketing analytics. The site loads moderately fast with good mobile responsiveness and basic accessibility features. SEO optimization is basic with proper meta tags but could be improved with structured data and richer metadata. No hosting provider information was identified from the content. The technical implementation is solid for a small fintech incubator but could benefit from performance tuning and enhanced SEO 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 wng.co. 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 wng.co.

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.