Skip to main content

Security report for admonsters.com

AdMonsters · Media · N/a

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

AdMonsters is a well-established media and community platform focused on advertising operations, programmatic advertising, and industry events. Founded in 1999, it serves a niche audience of ad operations professionals and media buyers, providing news, conferences, and community engagement. The website demonstrates a solid market position with reputable partnerships and a consistent brand presence. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern integrations such as Google Tag Manager, Osano CMP for privacy compliance, and Google Publisher Tags for ad management. Performance and mobile optimization are good, though accessibility could be improved. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS and consent management, but lacks explicit security headers and public security policies. Overall, the site is professional, trustworthy, and compliant with privacy regulations, though it could enhance transparency by adding terms of service and contact details.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of admonsters.com. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
80/ 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

4 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. 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 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 admonsters.com

This scan found 19 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. 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
65
Security headers
50
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
80
Average
73

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 admonsters.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
16
Employees
0
Customers
16
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
0%

3 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 admonsters.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

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

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

AdMonsters operates in the media sector, targeting advertising professionals with a content-driven business model supported by events, sponsorships, and advertising revenue. Its partnerships with industry leaders and media brands strengthen its ecosystem. The company appears medium-sized with a long operational history. The lack of visible direct contact info on the homepage suggests a focus on community and content rather than direct sales. The presence of job listings and sponsorship pages indicates active business development. The site leverages multiple marketing and analytics tools to optimize user engagement and advertising effectiveness.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses a reputable consent management platform (Osano) to comply with GDPR and other privacy regulations. However, the absence of visible security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, or X-Frame-Options reduces the overall security robustness. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is publicly available, which could hinder transparency and trust. The site uses multiple third-party scripts and ad networks, which require ongoing monitoring for vulnerabilities. Overall, the security posture is moderate but can be improved by implementing recommended headers and publishing security policies.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce security headers including CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Publish a clear terms of service page to improve legal transparency and user trust.
  3. Add visible and verified contact information including company email and phone number for better user support and credibility.
  4. Establish and publicize an incident response and vulnerability disclosure policy to demonstrate security maturity.
  5. Conduct regular audits of third-party scripts and plugins to minimize risk from external dependencies.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
AdMonsters
Description
Ad operations news, conferences, events, community
Key services
Industry news, Conferences and events, Community engagement, Sponsorship opportunities, Job listings
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress CMS, jQuery, Google Tag Manager, Google Publisher Tags (GPT), Osano Consent Management Platform, AddSearch, New Relic Browser monitoring, AI Ad Management plugin, Cloudflare DNS
Frameworks
Bootstrap (implied from navbar classes), Yoast SEO plugin
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent with granular controls
  • Use of Osano CMP for privacy compliance

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Parsely, New Relic Browser
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Ad Manager (GPT), AppNexus (adnxs.com)
Tracking pixels
Google Analytics (via GTM), Parsely
Marketing tools
AddSearch, Osano CMP, AI Ad Management plugin, Olytics
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website uses a reputable consent management platform (Osano) with granular cookie controls
  2. Strong social media presence on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn
  3. Multiple reputable media partners linked in footer
  4. Use of modern ad serving and analytics technologies
  5. No visible contact email or phone number on homepage
  6. No terms of service page detected
  7. Good SEO and metadata implementation
  8. No explicit security headers detected in provided data
  9. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure found
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with a modern tech stack including jQuery, Google Tag Manager, and Google Publisher Tags for ad serving. It integrates Osano CMP for cookie consent and privacy compliance, and uses AddSearch for site search functionality. Hosting and DNS are managed via GoDaddy and Cloudflare respectively. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization. SEO is well implemented with Yoast SEO plugin and comprehensive metadata including Open Graph and JSON-LD structured data. Accessibility is basic and could be enhanced. The site uses multiple advertising and analytics tools, indicating a mature digital marketing infrastructure. Technical risks include reliance on multiple third-party scripts and lack of explicit security headers.
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. 83/100Low23 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with admonsters.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 admonsters.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.