Skip to main content

Security report for 360proxy.com

Cherry Proxy · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

74/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Cherry Proxy is a technology-focused company providing residential proxy IP services globally, targeting businesses and individuals requiring concealed, safe, and fast proxy IPs. The website is professionally designed using WordPress and integrates modern technologies such as Firebase Analytics and Google Tag Manager, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. Security posture is solid with HTTPS enforced and cookie consent mechanisms in place, although the absence of security headers and explicit incident response policies suggests room for improvement. The lack of WHOIS data and contact information introduces some trust concerns, warranting further verification. Overall, the website presents a functional and professional front but should enhance transparency and security practices to strengthen credibility and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
100/ 100 · Low
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

3 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 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. 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 SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-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

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

Keep watching 360proxy.com

This scan found 19 issues across 5 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. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

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
75
Security headers
30
Email security
70
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
100
Average
74

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention 360proxy.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
1,869
Employees
2
Customers
1,861
Third parties
6
Weak passwords
20%

Latest record dated 2026-04-28 · 6 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for 360proxy.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • –360proxy.com2026-04-28
  • –www.360proxy.com2025-08-26

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Cherry Proxy operates in the proxy service market, positioning itself as a cost-effective provider of residential proxies. Its business model revolves around selling proxy IP access, with payment processing handled by reputable partners such as PayPal and Adyen. The target customers are likely businesses and individuals needing proxy services for privacy, security, or data scraping. The company leverages analytics and marketing tools to optimize user engagement and advertising effectiveness. However, the absence of clear company registration details and contact information limits full business intelligence assessment. The partnership ecosystem with major payment providers is a positive indicator of operational legitimacy.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a good security baseline with HTTPS and cookie consent compliance. However, it lacks visible security headers like Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options, which are recommended to mitigate common web attacks. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The absence of a published security policy or incident response contact reduces transparency and preparedness for security incidents. Compliance with GDPR is indicated by the cookie consent mechanism and privacy policy. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be enhanced by implementing additional headers, publishing security policies, and providing incident response contacts.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
  3. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience.
  4. Provide clear and verified company contact information including emails and phone numbers.
  5. Regularly audit WHOIS data and domain registration to ensure transparency and trustworthiness.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Cherry Proxy
Description
Cherry Proxy provides high-quality global residential proxy IP resources that are more concealed, safer, and faster.
Key services
Residential Proxy, Residential IP, SOCKS5 proxy
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, jQuery, Firebase, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Cookiebot, Swiper.js
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Firebase Analytics
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google AdSense, Google Ads
Tracking pixels
Google Ads Conversion Tracking
Marketing tools
Firebase Analytics
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website uses HTTPS with valid SSL
  2. Cookie consent banner present and functional
  3. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on homepage
  4. WHOIS data unavailable, raising some trust concerns
  5. Website content is professional and focused on proxy services
  6. Multiple external trusted domains linked (Google, PayPal, Adyen)
  7. Use of modern JavaScript libraries and Firebase analytics
  8. No signs of malware or phishing detected in content
  9. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure page found
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with extensive use of JavaScript libraries including jQuery, Swiper.js, and Firebase SDKs for analytics. It integrates Google Tag Manager and multiple Google Ads conversion tracking scripts, indicating a sophisticated marketing and analytics setup. The site uses Cookiebot for cookie consent management, reflecting attention to privacy compliance. Performance is moderate with some loading scripts deferred or async. Mobile optimization is good, and SEO meta tags are properly configured. Hosting provider details are not explicitly found. The technical stack is modern but could benefit from improved security headers and enhanced 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 360proxy.com. 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 360proxy.com.

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.