Skip to main content

Security report for battleofsongs.com

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

52/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website www.battleofsongs.com is a Japanese language content site focused on recommending skincare products, specifically lotions for sensitive skin. It provides product rankings, advice on ingredient safety, moisturizing, and pH balance, targeting individuals with sensitive skin. The business model appears to be content-driven, likely monetized through affiliate marketing links to external product sites. The site is small in scale with basic design and navigation features. Technically, the site uses standard HTML, CSS, and JavaScript with no detected CMS or advanced frameworks. Performance and mobile optimization are basic, and SEO practices are minimal. There is no evidence of HTTPS or security headers from the provided data, which is a concern. The site includes tracking scripts from Research Artisan Pro, indicating moderate user tracking without visible privacy compliance mechanisms. From a security perspective, the absence of HTTPS confirmation, security headers, privacy policies, and direct contact information reduces the site's trustworthiness. The WHOIS lookup failed to find any registration data for the domain, which is a critical red flag suggesting the domain may be unregistered, expired, or privacy protected in a way that is not standard. This discrepancy between active website content and missing WHOIS data significantly impacts legitimacy and trust. Overall, the site presents moderate content quality but suffers from poor security posture and privacy compliance. The domain registration inconsistency is a major concern. Strategic recommendations include implementing HTTPS, adding privacy and cookie policies, improving contact transparency, and resolving domain registration issues to enhance trust and security.

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

8 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 battleofsongs.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
15
Email security
85
DNS health
70
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
50
Average
52

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 operates in the niche skincare advice market, focusing on sensitive skin lotion recommendations for Japanese consumers. Its competitive advantage lies in targeted content with product rankings and ingredient advice. The business model is likely affiliate marketing, linking to various external product sites. The site links to numerous unrelated domains, possibly for SEO or affiliate purposes, but no clear partnerships or subsidiaries are identified. Growth indicators are limited due to lack of business transparency and missing registration data. The absence of company information and certifications limits credibility. The partnership ecosystem is unclear, and the site appears to be a small independent content publisher.

Security posture

The security maturity level of the website is low. Key vulnerabilities include lack of HTTPS confirmation, absence of security headers, no privacy or cookie policies, and no direct contact information for security or abuse reporting. The WHOIS data absence raises concerns about domain legitimacy and management. There is no evidence of compliance with GDPR or other data protection regulations. Incident response readiness is unknown due to missing contact channels. The site uses third-party tracking scripts without visible user consent mechanisms, indicating privacy compliance gaps. Overall, the security culture appears minimal, exposing the site and its users to potential risks.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate to secure user connections.
  2. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance statements.
  3. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  4. Provide clear contact information including security and abuse email addresses.
  5. Resolve domain registration issues to ensure legitimacy and trustworthiness.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
The website provides recommendations and rankings for skincare products, specifically focusing on lotions for sensitive skin. It offers advice on selecting suitable products emphasizing moisturizing, pH balance, and ingredient safety.
Key services
Product rankings, Skincare advice, Affiliate links to related products
Content quality
good
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS, JavaScript
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
30/100

Analytics and tracking

Services
Research Artisan Pro
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Research Artisan Pro
Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website content is in Japanese focused on sensitive skin lotion recommendations.
  2. No HTTPS or security headers information available from provided data.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  4. Contact available only via a contact form page; no direct emails or phone numbers found.
  5. Multiple external links to unrelated domains, possibly affiliate or SEO purposes.
  6. Tracking scripts from Research Artisan Pro detected.
  7. No social media or company contact emails found.
  8. WHOIS data missing, indicating domain may be unregistered or expired.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with basic HTML, CSS, and JavaScript without use of modern frameworks or CMS platforms. The design is simple and mobile optimization is basic. Performance is moderate but could be improved with modern best practices. SEO is minimal with basic meta tags and canonical link present. The site includes a third-party tracking script from Research Artisan Pro, indicating some level of user analytics. No advanced technical infrastructure or hosting provider information is available. Technical debt appears low but modernization opportunities exist to improve security, performance, and user experience.
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 battleofsongs.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 battleofsongs.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.