Skip to main content

Security report for a1.gallery

A1 · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

64/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website www.a1.gallery serves as a curated platform offering website design inspiration targeted at designers, developers, and creatives. It aggregates and showcases exemplary websites from across the web, positioning itself as a niche content curation service within the technology industry. The business model revolves around providing inspiration and design ideas rather than direct commercial services. The site branding is consistent and the content quality is good, appealing primarily to a specialized creative audience. Technically, the website is built on the Webflow CMS platform, leveraging modern JavaScript libraries and Finsweet attributes for enhanced CMS filtering and loading capabilities. Google Tag Manager is integrated for analytics and tracking purposes. The site demonstrates good mobile optimization and SEO practices, although accessibility features are basic. Performance is moderate, typical for CMS-driven design inspiration sites. From a security perspective, the site employs HTTPS with an excellent SSL configuration, but lacks several recommended security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerabilities were detected in the provided content. However, the absence of privacy and cookie policies, as well as contact and incident response information, indicates gaps in compliance and transparency. The WHOIS data is privacy protected or unavailable, which slightly reduces trustworthiness but is not uncommon for this type of platform. Overall, the website presents a moderate risk profile with strengths in content and technical implementation but weaknesses in privacy compliance and security best practices. Strategic improvements in policy disclosures, security headers, and registrant transparency would enhance trust and compliance.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of a1.gallery. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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

7 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • High

      No Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

    • 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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, Cloudflare

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

  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 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

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

Keep watching a1.gallery

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
62
Security headers
60
Email security
70
DNS health
55
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
64

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

The platform operates as a specialized content curation service within the technology sector, focusing on website design inspiration. Its competitive advantage lies in the aggregation of high-quality design examples, serving a niche audience of designers and developers. The business model is likely based on traffic monetization or brand positioning rather than direct sales. There is no evidence of extensive partnerships or subsidiaries. Growth indicators are limited due to lack of business data. The ecosystem includes modern CMS and analytics tools, supporting digital maturity but lacking in compliance transparency.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic to moderate security maturity level. HTTPS is properly implemented with strong SSL configuration, ensuring encrypted communications. However, the absence of key security headers reduces protection against common web attacks such as clickjacking and MIME sniffing. No forms or input fields were detected, minimizing attack surface, but also indicating limited user interaction. Privacy and cookie policies are missing, which is a compliance gap under GDPR and related regulations. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are present, limiting readiness for security events. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a content site but requires enhancements to meet best practices and regulatory requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve GDPR compliance and user trust.
  2. Add security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against web vulnerabilities.
  3. Provide clear contact information and establish an incident response contact channel such as security@ or abuse@ email addresses.
  4. Consider publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy and security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking tools to ensure no vulnerable or privacy-invasive components are included.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
A1
Description
A collection of the best websites found across the World Wide Web. Design inspiration for all designers, developers and creatives.
Key services
website design inspiration, curated collections of websites
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Webflow, Google Tag Manager, Finsweet CMS Filter, Finsweet CMS Load, Finsweet CMS Static
Frameworks
Webflow
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No exposed sensitive data detected

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager)
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a curated design inspiration platform targeting designers and developers.
  2. Content is well structured with good SEO and mobile optimization.
  3. No contact or privacy policies found, which is a compliance gap.
  4. WHOIS data is privacy protected or unavailable, limiting domain trust analysis.
  5. No security headers detected; HTTPS is enabled.
  6. Uses modern Webflow CMS and Finsweet attributes for CMS filtering and loading.
  7. Google Tag Manager is used for analytics and tracking.
  8. No forms detected in the provided HTML snippet.
  9. No emails, phone numbers, or social media links explicitly found in the HTML content.
  10. No evidence of security incident response or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the Webflow CMS platform, utilizing JavaScript and Finsweet attributes for dynamic CMS filtering and loading. Google Tag Manager is integrated for analytics and marketing tracking. The site uses modern web standards with valid meta tags and SEO optimization. Mobile responsiveness is good, though accessibility features are basic. Performance is moderate, typical for CMS-based sites with rich media content. Hosting is provided by Webflow, a reputable provider. There is no evidence of legacy or vulnerable libraries. Technical risks are low but could be improved by enhancing security headers and privacy 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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 54/100Medium29 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with a1.gallery. 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 a1.gallery.

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.