RegsJ
Denmark · regsj.dk · 6 vendors
I am sorry, but I cannot browse external websites or databases to research company information. Therefore, I cannot provide the requested details for RegsJ based on the domain regsj.dk. My capabilities are limited to using the provided tools, and I do not have a tool for web research.
Resilience scores
- Digital Sovereignty: 17
- Digital Resilience: 4
Technology vendors
- Barracuda Networks, Inc. — Cybersecurity — United States
- DemensAI ApS — Denmark
- GMO GlobalSign K.K. — Technology — Japan
- and 3 more
Insights
Last updated 2026-09-01 · revision 22
6 direct vendors, 100 subvendors
Direct vendors by controlling owner country (sample)
- United States: 3
- Japan: 2
- Denmark: 1
Subvendors by controlling owner country (sample)
- France: 1
- Netherlands: 1
- Australia: 1
Migration Readiness: 3/10
Assessed by AI based on technology stack characteristics (cloud-native vs legacy, containerization, microservices), regulatory environment, data residency requirements, financial stability, and vendor lock-in risks. The score ranges from 0-10, where higher scores indicate better readiness for technology migration.
RegsJ's migration readiness is low, primarily hampered by a highly complex and high-risk regulatory environment, stringent data residency requirements, and a complete absence of information regarding its internal technology stack and financial capacity. The company is subject to GDPR and the Danish Data Protection Act, which impose strict data transfer restrictions (Chapter V) and require Transfer Impact Assessments for non-EU/EEA data flows. The Danish Bookkeeping Act mandates digital bookkeeping with specific data storage and accessibility requirements for authorities, directly impacting cloud migration choices. Upcoming EU regulations like the EU Data Act (from Sept 2025) and EU Data Governance Act will further complicate data portability and storage. The lack of data on RegsJ's internal tech stack (e.g., cloud-nativeness, containerization, microservices adoption) is a major impediment to assessing migration feasibility, effort, and cost; it suggests a high likelihood of legacy systems that would require significant re-platforming. Similarly, the absence of financial stability data means the company's ability to fund a potentially costly and complex migration project is unknown. While 12 services are utilized with vendor geographic diversity, the 'Total Vendors: 0' entry creates ambiguity around vendor lock-in risk, which could be a significant challenge if complex contracts are in place. The cumulative effect of these factors indicates substantial challenges and high uncertainty for any potential migration initiative.
Compliance
8 in-scope frameworks identified; showing 3.
EU AI Act (source) — Assessment Required
The EU AI Act entered into force on 1 August 2024 with phased applicability (prohibited AI systems: February 2025; high-risk systems: August 2026; general-purpose AI: August 2025). It applies to providers and deployers of AI systems in the EU. The risk is currently Low for most companies in the 'Other' sector unless they develop or deploy high-risk AI systems. As RegsJ's activities are unknown, this is flagged for awareness rather than immediate action.
Evidence: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32024R1689, https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/regulatory-framework-ai, https://www.datatilsynet.dk/english/artificial-intelligence
NIS2 (source) — Assessment Required
NIS2 applies to medium and large enterprises (50+ employees OR €10M+ annual turnover) operating in sectors listed as Essential or Important Entities. RegsJ's industry is classified as 'Other', which does not map directly to any NIS2 Essential or Important Entity sector. However, without confirmed information on company size, revenue, or precise business activities, it is not possible to definitively exclude NIS2 applicability — particularly if RegsJ provides digital services, ICT services, or operates in a supply chain touching regulated sectors. The risk is Medium because if NIS2 does apply and the company is non-compliant, Danish enforcement (via the Centre for Cyber Security, CFCS) can impose significant sanctions. Denmark transposed NIS2 via the 'Lov om net- og informationssikkerhed' (NIS2 Act, effective October 2024).
Evidence: https://www.cfcs.dk/en/, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32022L2555, https://www.ft.dk/samling/20231/lovforslag/l111/index.htm, https://www.sikkerdigital.dk/virksomhed/nis2
ISO 27001 (source) — Assessment Required
ISO 27001 is an internationally recognized standard for information security management. While voluntary, it is increasingly expected by enterprise customers, public sector clients, and as part of NIS2 compliance evidence in the EU. For a Danish company of unknown size and sector, ISO 27001 is broadly recommended as a best-practice framework. The risk is Medium because: (1) NIS2 compliance in the EU often references ISO 27001 controls; (2) Danish public procurement increasingly requires ISO 27001 or equivalent; (3) without it, the company may face commercial disadvantage or fail supplier due diligence checks.
Evidence: https://www.iso.org/standard/27001, https://www.danak.dk/en/, https://www.ds.dk/en/standards/it/iso-27001
Financials
Signed-in users can see whether their own company is exposed to this vendor's disruption, plus the full sub-vendor list and country breakdowns, every in-scope compliance framework plus gaps and next steps, and alerts when any of it changes.