Skip to main content

Security report for aprl.cat

Technology · United Kingdom

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

Security score

67/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website aprl.cat is a personal site belonging to an individual named April, a 20-year-old from the UK with interests in programming, music, skateboarding, and cats. The site serves as a personal blog and portfolio showcasing her hobbies, technical skills, and social media presence. It targets a general audience interested in personal tech and music culture. The site is small-scale and non-commercial, with no evident business operations or monetization. Technically, the site is custom-built with vanilla HTML, CSS, and JavaScript, hosted behind Cloudflare DNS and CDN services. It integrates WebSocket connections to the Lanyard API for real-time Discord presence updates. The site lacks a CMS and advanced frameworks but uses modern programming languages and tools in the background as described by the owner. Security posture is moderate with domain transfer protections but lacks DNSSEC and security headers. Privacy and cookie policies are absent, reducing compliance. WHOIS data shows inconsistencies, notably a domain creation date in the future, which raises questions about domain legitimacy. Overall, the site is functional and moderately secure but would benefit from improved security headers, privacy compliance, and WHOIS data accuracy.

Scanned

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. 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 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 aprl.cat

This scan found 21 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
75
Security headers
50
Email security
70
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
67

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 represents a personal brand rather than a commercial business. It does not operate in a traditional market sector but aligns with the technology and creative personal blogging space. The owner leverages social media platforms to engage with a niche audience interested in programming, music, and lifestyle content. There is no evidence of revenue streams or partnerships. The site’s growth potential depends on personal content creation and community engagement. The lack of formal business information and certifications limits its commercial credibility. The domain's future creation date and incomplete WHOIS data suggest possible administrative oversights or placeholder registration data.

Security posture

Security maturity is basic to moderate. The domain benefits from transfer prohibitions preventing unauthorized transfers but lacks DNSSEC, which is a recommended best practice. No security headers such as CSP, HSTS, or X-Frame-Options are detected, exposing the site to potential risks. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates compliance gaps with GDPR and related regulations. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, limiting transparency and readiness. The site uses HTTPS (implied by Cloudflare usage) but no explicit SSL configuration details are available. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a personal site but insufficient for commercial or sensitive data handling.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement essential security headers including Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, and X-Frame-Options.
  3. Publish privacy and cookie policies to improve GDPR compliance and user trust.
  4. Correct WHOIS registration data to reflect accurate domain creation date and registrant details.
  5. Add incident response and vulnerability disclosure information to demonstrate security maturity.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Personal website of April, a 20-year-old UK-based individual passionate about music, programming, video games, math, nature, cooking, skateboarding, and cats. Shares personal interests, technical preferences, and social links.
Key services
personal blogging, sharing technical and personal interests, social media engagement
Content quality
good
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, Cloudflare DNS, WebSocket, Lanyard API, Visual Studio Code, Rust, Haskell, Zig, Docker, QEMU
Frameworks
none explicitly detected
Platforms
macOS, Windows 11, Arch Linux
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
55/100
Good practices seen
  • Domain status includes clientTransferProhibited and serverTransferProhibited
  • No DNSSEC enabled

Analytics and tracking

Services
Cloudflare Insights
Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Cloudflare Insights
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Personal website with detailed personal and technical interests
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found
  3. No forms present on the site
  4. Social media presence is strong with multiple verified platforms
  5. No business or commercial activity evident
  6. No security policies or incident response info provided
  7. No explicit security headers detected
  8. Domain WHOIS data inconsistent with creation date in the future
  9. Website uses Cloudflare DNS and CDN services
  10. Uses WebSocket connection to Lanyard API for Discord presence integration
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with standard HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript without reliance on a CMS or heavy frameworks. It uses Cloudflare for DNS and CDN services, improving performance and availability. The site integrates a WebSocket connection to the Lanyard API for Discord presence, indicating some dynamic content capabilities. The tech stack mentioned by the owner includes modern programming languages (Rust, Haskell, Zig) and tools (Docker, QEMU), though these are not directly reflected in the site code. Performance is moderate with basic mobile optimization and accessibility. SEO is minimal with no Open Graph or structured data detected. The site could benefit from enhanced meta tags, accessibility improvements, and performance tuning.
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 aprl.cat. 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 aprl.cat.

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.