Skip to main content

Security report for beehaw.org

Beehaw · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

57/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Beehaw is a small, user-funded social media and news aggregation platform founded in 2021, focused on providing a safe, friendly, and diverse online community. It positions itself as an alternative to mainstream social media by emphasizing moderation and protection of minority rights. The platform is built on the open-source Lemmy software, leveraging federated social media technology. Its technical infrastructure is modern and secure, with HTTPS and security headers properly configured, though DNSSEC is not enabled. Privacy policies are comprehensive and GDPR compliant, with clear data retention and user rights outlined. The security posture is solid but could be improved with formal vulnerability disclosure mechanisms and DNSSEC. Overall, Beehaw demonstrates a trustworthy and community-oriented approach with transparent funding and active moderation.

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

6 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: YouTube

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

  2. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

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

Keep watching beehaw.org

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
42
Security headers
80
Email security
65
DNS health
80
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
35
Average
57

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

Beehaw operates in the technology and media sectors as a niche social media platform targeting users seeking moderated, safe, and inclusive online spaces. Its business model relies entirely on user donations, managed transparently through Open Collective. The platform's competitive advantage lies in its strong moderation policies and community focus, appealing to underprivileged and minority groups. The ecosystem includes partnerships with Open Collective and federated social media instances. Growth indicators include an active user base of nearly 14,000 users and multiple active communities. Strategic observations suggest continued emphasis on transparency, community engagement, and technical improvements to enhance trust and scalability.

Security posture

Beehaw maintains a good security posture with HTTPS enforced, strong password hashing, and security headers implemented. The platform logs IP addresses with retention policies and provides clear abuse and legal contact channels. However, the absence of DNSSEC and a published security.txt file indicates room for improvement in DNS security and vulnerability disclosure. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. Compliance with GDPR is evident through detailed privacy policies. Incident response readiness is supported by dedicated abuse and DMCA emails. Overall, the security culture appears proactive but could benefit from formalized security policies and certifications.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the beehaw.org domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Publish a security.txt file to facilitate responsible vulnerability disclosure and improve transparency.
  3. Develop and publish a formal security policy and incident response plan accessible to users.
  4. Consider obtaining recognized security certifications (e.g., ISO 27001) to strengthen trust.
  5. Enhance accessibility features and SEO optimization to improve user experience and discoverability.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Beehaw
Description
Beehaw is a user-funded social media and news aggregator platform focused on creating a safe, friendly, and diverse online community. It aims to counteract ineffective moderation on major platforms by promoting healthier environments, safe spaces, and minority rights.
Key services
Social media posting and aggregation, Community moderation, News aggregation, User community engagement
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap (CSS framework), JavaScript, WebManifest, SSL/TLS
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Password hashing with strong algorithm
  • IP logging retention policies
  • Moderation and abuse contact emails provided

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a Lemmy-based federated social media platform focused on safe, moderated community.
  2. Content is accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  3. Privacy and legal policies are comprehensive and publicly available.
  4. No phone numbers or physical addresses found; contact primarily via email.
  5. No terms of service explicitly found.
  6. No explicit security certifications or vulnerability disclosure policies found.
  7. Active community with multiple admins and moderators.
  8. Custom emojis and branding consistent with community theme.
  9. No advertising or tracking services detected.
  10. Site uses HTTPS with good security headers but lacks DNSSEC.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the Lemmy open-source federated social media platform, using Bootstrap for styling and JavaScript for interactivity. It supports modern web standards including Web App Manifest and responsive design, ensuring good mobile optimization. Performance is moderate with no major issues detected. The site uses HTTPS with strong security headers but lacks DNSSEC. No major technical debt or deprecated libraries were identified. The platform's federated nature and user moderation model provide resilience and community control. Opportunities exist to improve SEO, accessibility, and formalize security disclosures.
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 beehaw.org. 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 beehaw.org.

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.