Skip to main content

Security report for alyxia.dev

alyxia · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

55/100

Risk levelMedium

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

alyxia.dev is a personal website representing a full stack developer named alyxia. The site serves primarily as a portfolio and personal presence, linking to various social profiles and community sites. It is built using modern web technologies including Astro and Vue, indicating a moderate level of technical maturity. The site is hosted likely on Neocities or similar platforms, with a simple but functional design. Security posture is minimal with no detected security headers or policies, and no privacy or cookie policies are present, which is typical for personal sites but limits compliance and trust signals. The domain uses privacy protection, which is appropriate for a personal site. Overall, the site is safe, with no adult or explicit content, and no WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 100 · Medium
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. 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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

    • 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 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

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

Keep watching alyxia.dev

This scan found 23 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
72
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
85
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
50
Average
55

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 website targets a niche audience interested in the developer's work and personal interests. It does not represent a commercial business but rather a personal brand. The business model is personal branding and community engagement. There are no revenue streams or commercial services evident. The site links extensively to community and partner sites within a webring, indicating a collaborative ecosystem. The lack of formal business information or certifications aligns with its personal nature.

Security posture

Security maturity is low with no explicit security policies, incident response contacts, or certifications. The absence of security headers and privacy policies indicates limited focus on security best practices. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the content. The site uses HTTPS (inferred from URL scheme), but no further SSL configuration details are available. Incident response readiness is not demonstrated. Overall, the security posture is minimal but acceptable for a personal site with low risk.

Recommendations

  1. Add a privacy policy and cookie policy to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Implement standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Provide explicit contact information including a verified email address for business or security inquiries.
  4. Consider adding a security policy or vulnerability disclosure page to enhance transparency.
  5. Regularly review and update third-party dependencies and scripts to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
alyxia
Description
Personal website of a full stack developer named alyxia, showcasing personal interests, online presence, and links to social profiles.
Key services
full stack development
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
Astro, Vue
Frameworks
Astro, Vue
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
30/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a personal portfolio for a full stack developer named alyxia.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. No explicit contact emails or phone numbers visible; contact form is available.
  4. No security policies or incident response information provided.
  5. No advertising or tracking technologies detected.
  6. Site uses Astro framework with Vue components.
  7. External links mostly to personal or community sites and social profiles.
  8. No adult or explicit content detected.
  9. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.
  10. WHOIS data is privacy protected, typical for personal sites.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using Astro framework with Vue components, indicating modern frontend technology usage. The site is moderately optimized for mobile and has basic accessibility features. Performance is moderate with no explicit performance optimizations detected. SEO is basic with minimal meta tags and no structured data or Open Graph tags present. Hosting appears to be on a community or personal hosting platform such as Neocities. There is no CMS detected. The site uses client-side hydration for dynamic components. Technical risks are low but could be improved by adding SEO metadata, accessibility enhancements, and 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

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with alyxia.dev. 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 alyxia.dev.

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.