Skip to main content

Security report for xenomedia.nl

XENOMEDIA internetbureau · Technology · Netherlands

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

61/100

Risk levelMedium

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

XENOMEDIA internetbureau is a well-established Dutch digital services company specializing in web design, online marketing, hosting, and communication services. With over 25 years of experience, it targets small to medium businesses and multinationals, offering a comprehensive suite of services including website and webshop development, Microsoft 365 solutions, and marketing communications. The company maintains a professional online presence with clear branding and consistent messaging. Technically, the website is built primarily on Drupal 9 with WordPress components, leveraging modern web technologies and third-party services such as Google Tag Manager and WP Statistics for analytics. The site is mobile-optimized and SEO-friendly, providing a good user experience. Security posture is solid with HTTPS enabled and no visible vulnerabilities, though the absence of security headers and explicit incident response policies suggests room for improvement. Privacy compliance is adequate with clear privacy and cookie policies, but lacks an active cookie consent mechanism. Overall, the domain registration data aligns well with the business claims, supporting legitimacy and trustworthiness.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
73/ 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

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 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
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 384-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

  4. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • High

      High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

      Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

      What to do: Consider restricting access to FTP or implementing strong authentication

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

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

Keep watching xenomedia.nl

This scan found 20 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
65
Email security
85
DNS health
70
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
73
Average
61

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

XENOMEDIA holds a strong market position as a full-service internet agency with a long operational history since 2004. Its business model focuses on providing tailored digital solutions to a diverse client base, including individuals, SMEs, and large enterprises. The company leverages a multi-service approach combining web development, hosting, and marketing, which supports recurring revenue streams through hosting and maintenance contracts. Social media integration and active online marketing efforts enhance brand visibility. The absence of parent or subsidiary companies indicates an independent operation. The company’s registration and VAT details are clearly presented, reinforcing credibility. Strategic partnerships or related domains were not identified, suggesting a focused business scope.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a baseline security maturity with HTTPS enforced and no exposed sensitive data. However, the lack of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options reduces defense-in-depth. No public security or incident response policies were found, which may impact customer confidence and regulatory compliance. The domain does not use DNSSEC, which could improve DNS security. No vulnerability disclosures or security.txt files are present, limiting transparency for security researchers. Overall, the security posture is adequate but could benefit from enhanced policies, headers, and incident response readiness to meet higher standards and compliance requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers (CSP, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to strengthen browser security.
  2. Enable DNSSEC for the domain to protect against DNS spoofing and improve domain security.
  3. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and trust.
  4. Add an active cookie consent mechanism to comply fully with GDPR and enhance user privacy controls.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party libraries and plugins to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
XENOMEDIA internetbureau
Registration number
27182135
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
XENOMEDIA internetbureau
Description
Met ruim 25 jaar ervaring en een streven naar uitstekende service is XENOMEDIA de ideale keuze voor al jouw online marketingbehoeften
Key services
Websites / Webshops, Microsoft 365, Marketing / Communicatie, Domeinnaam / Hosting, WordPress onderhoud, Fotografie
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Drupal 9, WordPress (implied by wp-admin and wpb references), Google Tag Manager, jQuery, FontAwesome, Material Icons, Owl Carousel
Frameworks
Drupal, WordPress
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No visible vulnerable libraries

Analytics and tracking

Services
WP Statistics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

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. Clear business focus on web services and online marketing
  3. Strong presence of contact information and social media links
  4. No signs of malicious or suspicious activity
  5. No explicit security policy or incident response information publicly available
  6. No cookie consent mechanism despite cookie policy page
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a hybrid technology stack primarily based on Drupal 9 with WordPress elements, supported by common web libraries such as jQuery and FontAwesome. Google Tag Manager is used for analytics and marketing tracking, and WP Statistics provides visitor insights. The site is mobile responsive and optimized for SEO with proper meta tags and structured data (JSON-LD). Hosting details are not explicitly disclosed, but domain registration is with Realtime Register. Performance is moderate with no critical issues detected. Accessibility features are basic and could be improved. The site architecture and navigation are clear and user-friendly, supporting good user experience. Technical risks are minimal but include the need for improved security headers and cookie consent mechanisms.
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 xenomedia.nl. 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 xenomedia.nl.

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.