Skip to main content

Security report for animaona.com

anima ona · Other · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

64/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Anima Ona is a small multidisciplinary studio specializing in research, art, and design, operated by Freia Achenbach and June Fàbregas. The website presents a professional and artistic digital presence using modern technologies such as SvelteKit, Mux video streaming, and Plausible analytics. However, the domain's WHOIS data is unavailable, raising concerns about the domain registration status and legitimacy. The site lacks critical compliance documents such as privacy and cookie policies, and no security headers were detected, indicating a need for improved security posture. Contact information is minimal, limited to a single email address. Overall, the website is functional and visually appealing but requires enhancements in security, compliance, and transparency to build greater trust.

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 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

    • 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

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

Keep watching animaona.com

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. 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
30
Email security
70
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
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 business operates in a niche creative sector focusing on art and design research. Its market positioning is that of a boutique studio targeting clients interested in multidisciplinary artistic projects. The business model appears to be service-based, offering creative and research services. There is no evidence of partnerships, subsidiaries, or parent companies. The website content is consistent and professionally presented, but the lack of detailed business information and domain registration data limits full confidence in business credibility. Growth indicators and revenue streams are not discernible from the website content.

Security posture

The current security posture is basic with no HTTPS or security header information explicitly provided in the data. The absence of privacy and cookie policies, as well as vulnerability disclosure mechanisms, indicates gaps in compliance with GDPR and best security practices. The use of modern frameworks and analytics is positive but should be complemented with stronger security controls. Incident response readiness and data protection officer information are not available, suggesting limited security governance. Recommendations include implementing security headers, enforcing HTTPS, publishing privacy and cookie policies, and establishing vulnerability disclosure processes.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with strong SSL/TLS configuration and enforce it site-wide.
  2. Add comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and enhance user trust.
  3. Deploy security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  4. Establish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to improve transparency.
  5. Enhance accessibility features and provide clearer navigation to improve user experience.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
anima ona
Description
anima ona ist ein multidisziplinäres Studio, bestehend aus Freia Achenbach und June Fàbregas. Das Duo studierte an der Staatlichen Akademie der Bildenden Künste
Key services
research, art, design
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Mux Video, Plausible Analytics, SvelteKit
Frameworks
SvelteKit
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
40/100

Analytics and tracking

Services
Plausible Analytics
Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Plausible Analytics
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible with no blocking or WAF detected.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the site.
  3. Contact information limited to a single email address in header navigation.
  4. No phone numbers or physical addresses found.
  5. No security headers detected in provided data.
  6. Modern frontend framework SvelteKit used with embedded Mux video player and Plausible analytics.
  7. No forms detected on the website.
  8. No social media links found in the HTML content.
  9. WHOIS data unavailable indicating possible unregistered domain or privacy protection.
  10. Content is safe and targeted at general audience interested in art and design.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern frontend framework (SvelteKit) and integrates Mux for video streaming and Plausible for privacy-focused analytics. The site loads multiple JavaScript modules and stylesheets, indicating a modular and component-based architecture. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization but basic accessibility and SEO features. No CMS or hosting provider information is detected. The absence of security headers and compliance documents suggests technical debt in security and privacy areas. Overall, the technical infrastructure is contemporary but requires improvements in security and compliance to reduce operational risks.
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 animaona.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 animaona.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.