Skip to main content

Is wirliebenbau.de a Scam? Security Check Results - wirliebenbau.de Reviews

wirliebenbau.de favicon

Is wirliebenbau.de Safe? Security Analysis for Startseite | WirliebenBau

Check if wirliebenbau.de is a scam or legitimate. Free security scan and reviews.

OtherGermanysmall
WordPressYoast SEO pluginElementorLearnDash LMSAstra theme
Analyzed 7/31/2025Completed 9:32:56 PM
48
Security Score
HIGH RISK

AI Summary

The website www.wirliebenbau.de appears to be a German-language site focused on construction or building services, as suggested by the domain name and language. The site uses WordPress CMS with popular plugins such as Yoast SEO and Elementor, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. The technical infrastructure is standard for small to medium business websites, with good mobile optimization and SEO practices. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled, but lacks advanced security headers and explicit privacy or cookie policies. No contact information or incident response details are present, which limits user trust and compliance with privacy regulations. Overall, the site is functional and professional but would benefit from enhanced security and compliance features.

Detected Technologies

WordPressYoast SEO pluginElementorLearnDash LMSAstra theme

🧠AI Business Intelligence

Technology stack, business insights, and market analysis powered by AI.

Business Intelligence

Market & Strategic Analysis

The business behind the website likely operates in the construction sector targeting German-speaking customers. The absence of detailed company information, contact details, or certifications suggests a small or medium-sized enterprise with a basic online presence. The use of WordPress and common plugins indicates a cost-effective digital strategy. No evident partnerships or subsidiaries are identified. The website's market positioning and business model remain unclear due to limited content and metadata.

Security Posture Analysis

Comprehensive Security Assessment

The website employs HTTPS, which is a fundamental security measure. However, the lack of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and others reduces its defense against common web attacks. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is provided, which is a gap in security readiness. The absence of privacy and cookie policies also indicates potential compliance issues with GDPR. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the provided content. Overall, the security posture is moderate but requires improvements to meet best practices and regulatory requirements.

Strategic Recommendations

Priority Actions for Security Improvement

1

Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with explicit user consent mechanisms to ensure GDPR compliance.

Observations

AI-powered comprehensive website and business analysis.

AI-Enhanced Website Analysis

Business Insights

Description:

The website appears to be related to construction or building services, indicated by the domain name 'wirliebenbau.de' (German for 'we love construction'). However, no explicit business description or company name is found in the provided content.

Content Quality:

basic

Branding:

moderate

Technical Stack

Technologies:
WordPressYoast SEO pluginElementorLearnDash LMSAstra theme
Performance:

moderate

Mobile:

good

Accessibility:

basic

SEO:

good

Security Assessment

Security Score:
70/100
Best Practices:
  • HTTPS enabled

Analytics & Tracking

Tracking Level:minimal
Privacy Compliance:poor

Advertising & Marketing

Transparency Level:poor

Website Quality Assessment

Design Quality:good
User Experience:good
Content Relevance:basic
Navigation Clarity:good
Professionalism:good
Trustworthiness:moderate

Key Observations

1

Website is accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.

🛡️Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis and recommendations.

Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis

25/100
Score

Weak Strict-Transport-Security configuration

LOW

Current value: "max-age=600000"

Missing X-Frame-Options header

HIGH

Prevents clickjacking attacks

Missing X-Content-Type-Options header

MEDIUM

Prevents MIME type sniffing

Missing Content-Security-Policy header

HIGH

Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

Missing X-XSS-Protection header

MEDIUM

Legacy XSS protection (deprecated but still recommended)

Missing Referrer-Policy header

LOW

Controls referrer information sent with requests

Missing Permissions-Policy header

MEDIUM

Controls browser features and APIs

Sensitive data may be cached

LOW

Cache-Control header should include "no-store" for sensitive pages

👤GDPR Compliance

Privacy and data protection assessment under GDPR regulations.

GDPR Compliance

Privacy and data protection assessment

73/100
Score

No Cookie Consent Banner found

HIGH

GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

Privacy policy may not be GDPR compliant

MEDIUM

Privacy policy lacks explicit GDPR compliance elements

GDPR Compliance Analysis

Privacy Policy85% confidence
Cookie Policy85% confidence
Contact Information Found90% confidence
emailphone

🛡️NIS2 Compliance

Network & Information Security Directive compliance assessment.

NIS2 Compliance

Network & Information Security Directive

17/100
Score

No information security framework found

HIGH

NIS2 requires documented cybersecurity and information security measures

No vulnerability disclosure policy

MEDIUM

NIS2 encourages coordinated vulnerability disclosure

No security policy documentation found

HIGH

NIS2 requires documented cybersecurity governance and risk management

No incident response procedures found

HIGH

NIS2 requires documented incident response and business continuity plans

No business continuity planning found

MEDIUM

NIS2 emphasizes operational resilience and business continuity

No security contact information

HIGH

NIS2 requires clear incident reporting channels

No vulnerability reporting mechanism

MEDIUM

Clear vulnerability reporting supports coordinated disclosure

No NIS2 reference found

LOW

Consider explicitly mentioning NIS2 compliance efforts

📧Email Security

SPF, DKIM, and DMARC validation and email security assessment.

Email Security

SPF, DKIM, and DMARC validation

85/100
Score

No BIMI Record

LOW

BIMI displays brand logos in email clients

No MTA-STS Policy

MEDIUM

MTA-STS enforces TLS for email delivery

No TLS-RPT Record

LOW

TLS-RPT provides reporting for email TLS issues

SPF
Sender Policy Framework
DKIM
DomainKeys Identified Mail
DMARC
Domain-based Message Authentication
MX Records
Mail Exchange Records
BIMI
Brand Indicators
MTA-STS
Mail Transfer Agent Security
TLS-RPT
TLS Reporting
DNSSEC
DNS Security
SPF Details
Record:
v=spf1 include:spf.protection.outlook.com -all
DNS Lookups:1/10
Policy:-all
DKIM Selectors Found
Selector:selector1(1416-bit rsa)
Selector:selector2(1416-bit rsa)

🏆SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis.

SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis

52/100
Score

Weak Protocols Supported

HIGH

Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

OCSP Stapling Not Enabled

LOW

OCSP stapling improves performance and privacy

Certificate Transparency Not Implemented

LOW

Certificate is not logged in Certificate Transparency logs

SSL Certificate Expires Within 90 Days

MEDIUM

SSL certificate expires in 30 days

Weak SSL Key Length

HIGH

SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

Partial SSL/TLS Assessment

LOW

Completed 3 of 4 security checks due to time constraints

Protocol Support

TLSv1.3TLSv1.2TLSv1.1

OCSP Status

OCSP Stapling Disabled

📊DNS Health

DNS configuration and security assessment.

DNS Health

DNS configuration and security assessment

60/100
Score

DNSSEC Not Enabled

MEDIUM

DNSSEC is not configured for this domain

CAA Records Not Configured

LOW

Certificate Authority Authorization (CAA) records not found

Domain Transfer Lock Not Enabled

MEDIUM

Domain can be transferred without authorization

Domain Delete Lock Not Enabled

LOW

Domain can be deleted without additional verification

No DMARC Record

MEDIUM

DMARC policy not configured

Domain Registration Details

Protection Level
none
Suspicious Indicators Detected
  • No domain protection locks enabled

DNS Records

A Records:85.13.163.188
Name Servers:
ns11.nameserver.de
ns12.nameserver.de
MX Records:
10: WirliebenBau-de.mail.protection.outlook.com
SOA:Serial: 2025072402, TTL: 3600s

DNSSEC Status

DNSSEC Not Enabled

DNS Performance

Resolution Time:73ms

SPF Analysis

SPF Record:
v=spf1 include:spf.protection.outlook.com -all

Network Security

Port scanning and network exposure analysis.

Network Security

Port scanning and network exposure analysis

0/100
Score

High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

HIGH

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

Service Exposed: SSH

MEDIUM

Port 22 (SSH) is publicly accessible - SSH - Secure but can be brute-forced

High-Risk Service Exposed: NetBIOS

HIGH

Port 139 (NetBIOS) is publicly accessible - NetBIOS - Windows file sharing

Critical Service Exposed: SMB

CRITICAL

Port 445 (SMB) is publicly accessible - SMB - Windows file sharing, high risk

Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

CRITICAL

Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

🔧Technical Analysis

Detailed technical findings and analysis from AI assessment.

Technical Analysis

Comprehensive security assessment findings

Additional Findings

The website is built on WordPress CMS using the Astra theme and plugins such as Yoast SEO, Elementor, and LearnDash LMS. Fonts are loaded via WOFF2 format for performance. The site is mobile optimized and uses modern CSS and HTML practices. Performance is moderate with some preloading of fonts. No advanced frameworks or hosting provider details are evident. The site lacks advanced security headers and analytics/tracking scripts, indicating a minimalistic technical footprint. There is opportunity to improve performance and security by optimizing headers and implementing caching/CDN solutions.
Analyze Another Website