Skip to main content

Security report for badssl.com

Technology

Low risk. 2 critical or high findings in Email security.

Security score

82/100

Risk levelLow

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

badssl.com is a specialized educational and testing website designed to demonstrate and test various HTTPS and SSL/TLS misconfigurations. It serves developers, security professionals, and testers by providing a wide range of subdomains that simulate different certificate and protocol issues. The site is positioned as a niche resource in the technology sector, focusing on security education and testing rather than commercial services. Technically, the site uses standard web technologies such as HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript without reliance on major CMS or frameworks, resulting in fast performance and good mobile optimization. Security-wise, the site enforces HTTPS and provides multiple test cases for SSL/TLS configurations, though it lacks explicit security headers and formal security policies. Privacy compliance is minimal, with no visible privacy or cookie policies, and no contact or business information is provided. Overall, the site is trustworthy and safe, with a strong focus on security education but limited business transparency or compliance documentation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

NIS2 outside view
55/ 100 · Medium
GDPR outside view
85/ 100 · Low
Checks completed
9of 9

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

The NIS2 figure counts only evidence anyone can see from the internet. 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

2 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • High

      No SPF record found

      badssl.com publishes no SPF record, so receiving servers cannot tell which servers may send mail as this domain.

      What to do: Publish one TXT record listing your mail providers, for example "v=spf1 include:_spf.yourprovider.com -all". A domain that sends no mail should publish "v=spf1 -all".

    • High

      No DMARC record found

      There is no DMARC record at _dmarc.badssl.com, so receivers have no instruction for mail that fails SPF and DKIM.

      What to do: Publish a TXT record at _dmarc.badssl.com, starting with "v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@badssl.com" and moving to p=quarantine or p=reject once reports look clean.

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

Keep watching badssl.com

This scan found 18 issues across 7 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
87
Security headers
53
Email security
57
DNS health
95
Network security
100
Website hygiene
95
GDPR outside view
85
Average
82

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.
  • Accessibility: Accessibility is a separate readout from security, so it is reported but not scored. 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 badssl.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
43
Employees
0
Customers
43
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
51%

6 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 badssl.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

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

Brand lookalikes

Add-on

Domains that imitate badssl.com and could be used for phishing or spoofed email, tracked in OffSeq Breach.

Tracked
11
Registered
11
Resolving
9
High or critical
0

Last checked 2026-10-25

Masked preview

  • ba••••.comMediumbitsquatting
  • da••••.comMediumhomoglyph
  • ba•••.comMediumomission

See the full lookalike list

A one-off add-on that lists up to 20 of the highest-risk lookalikes of badssl.com with registration, mail-server, certificate and DNS signals.

Select it in the checkout above.

Lookalike data refreshes continuously. Monitoring on Breach alerts you when a variant is registered, gains a mail server or starts serving HTTPS.

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

badssl.com operates as a small-scale, niche educational platform targeting developers and security professionals interested in SSL/TLS and HTTPS testing. Its business model is non-commercial, focusing on providing free resources for testing browser and server security configurations. The site’s competitive advantage lies in its comprehensive coverage of SSL/TLS misconfigurations and its open-source nature, as evidenced by the linked GitHub repository. There is no indication of revenue streams, partnerships, or subsidiaries. The platform’s growth is organic, driven by community and developer interest. The absence of business contact information or formal policies suggests a focus on utility rather than commercial expansion.

Security posture

The security posture of badssl.com is strong in terms of SSL/TLS implementation and educational value. The site enforces HTTPS and provides numerous subdomains illustrating both secure and insecure configurations, aiding in security awareness and testing. However, the lack of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and absence of published security policies or incident response contacts indicate areas for improvement. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. Privacy compliance is weak, with no GDPR or cookie consent mechanisms. Incident response readiness and security culture indicators are not publicly documented, limiting assessment of operational security maturity.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie consent mechanism to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Add standard security headers (e.g., Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options) to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Provide clear contact information and a security incident response policy to improve transparency and readiness.
  4. Enhance accessibility features to broaden usability and compliance with accessibility standards.
  5. Consider SEO improvements and metadata enhancements to increase discoverability and professional presentation.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
A memorable site for HTTPS misconfiguration used for testing SSL/TLS configurations and browser security features.
Key services
SSL/TLS misconfiguration test domains, Certificate testing, Client certificate downloads, Browser security feature demonstrations
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript
Performance
fast
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced on main site
  • Multiple test subdomains demonstrating SSL/TLS issues
  • Use of modern cipher suites and protocols in some test domains

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website serves as a comprehensive SSL/TLS and HTTPS misconfiguration testing platform.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. No contact information or business registration details provided.
  4. No advertising or tracking technologies detected.
  5. Strong focus on security education and testing with multiple subdomains demonstrating various SSL/TLS scenarios.
  6. No signs of malicious or adult content.
  7. Good technical implementation with modern HTML, CSS, and JavaScript.
  8. No CMS or third-party frameworks detected.
  9. No security headers explicitly detected in HTML content.
  10. GitHub repository linked, indicating open source or community involvement.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using clean, modern HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript without reliance on heavy frameworks or CMS platforms, resulting in fast loading times and good mobile responsiveness. The site structure is clear and well-organized, with multiple subdomains dedicated to specific SSL/TLS test cases. No third-party analytics, advertising, or tracking scripts were detected, indicating minimal technical overhead and privacy impact. However, the absence of explicit security headers and formal metadata such as Open Graph or JSON-LD structured data limits SEO and security posture. Hosting provider and infrastructure details are not disclosed in the HTML content. Overall, the technical implementation is solid for its purpose but could benefit from enhanced security and SEO best practices.
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 badssl.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 badssl.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.