Skip to main content

Security report for bonfire.com

Bonfire · E-commerce · N/a

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

75/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Bonfire is an e-commerce platform specializing in custom shirt design and print-on-demand services. The website offers users the ability to upload artwork or create designs using a free online tool, targeting individuals and groups interested in premium custom apparel. The platform positions itself as a niche provider in the custom apparel market with a focus on quality materials and user-friendly design tools. Technically, the site is built using modern web technologies including Framer for design, Google Tag Manager for analytics, and Intercom for customer support, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. The website is mobile-optimized and provides a good user experience with clear navigation and professional design. Security-wise, the site enforces HTTPS and uses common analytics and marketing scripts, but lacks visible security headers and a published security policy, which are areas for improvement. The absence of WHOIS data reduces domain trustworthiness, but the overall site content and infrastructure suggest a legitimate business. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security headers, publishing privacy and security policies, and improving transparency around incident response.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of bonfire.com. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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

4 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 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

  3. 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 SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching bonfire.com

This scan found 19 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
40
Email security
80
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
75

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

Bonfire operates in the e-commerce sector with a focus on custom apparel. Its business model revolves around enabling customers to design and order premium shirts online, leveraging print-on-demand technology. The platform targets creative individuals, organizations, and groups seeking personalized apparel solutions. The use of a proprietary online design tool and direct order placement differentiates it from generic apparel retailers. While the company size appears medium, no explicit founding year or parent company information is available. The website's branding is consistent and professional, supporting a positive market position. The integration of analytics and customer engagement tools suggests an emphasis on growth and customer experience. However, the lack of visible contact information and corporate details may limit some business credibility aspects.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a baseline security posture with HTTPS enabled and no exposed sensitive data in the HTML. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options indicates room for improvement in mitigating common web vulnerabilities. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files are present, and no incident response contacts are published, which could hinder timely security incident management. The use of third-party scripts like Heap Analytics and Intercom requires ongoing monitoring to prevent supply chain risks. Overall, the security maturity is moderate but could be enhanced by adopting best practices in security headers, transparency, and incident response readiness.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options.
  2. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service accessible from the website footer or dedicated pages.
  3. Establish and disclose an incident response process with clear contact channels for security issues.
  4. Regularly audit third-party scripts and dependencies for vulnerabilities and compliance.
  5. Consider adding a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to improve security transparency.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Bonfire
Description
Design premium custom shirts to sell online or place a direct order. Upload your artwork or design in our free online tool & choose products to print on. Get started today!
Key services
custom shirt design, online design tool, direct order placement, print on demand
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Framer, Google Tag Manager, Heap Analytics, Intercom, Convert Experiences
Frameworks
Framer
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • no exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Heap Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Convert Experiences
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Heap Analytics, Convert Experiences
Marketing tools
Intercom
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. WHOIS data is unavailable or domain may be unregistered or privacy protected.
  3. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service found on the homepage HTML.
  4. Cookie consent mechanism is present and active.
  5. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found in the HTML content.
  6. Use of modern web technologies and analytics tools is evident.
  7. No security headers detected in the provided data; SSL is properly configured.
  8. No evidence of adult or questionable content; content is safe for general audiences.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the Framer platform, leveraging modern JavaScript frameworks and third-party services such as Google Tag Manager, Heap Analytics, Convert Experiences, and Intercom for analytics and customer engagement. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and good SEO metadata including Open Graph and Twitter cards. Performance appears moderate, with some reliance on external scripts that may impact load times. Accessibility features are basic but present. No CMS other than Framer is detected. Hosting provider details are not explicitly available from the HTML content. Technical risks include dependency on multiple third-party scripts and lack of advanced security headers. Opportunities exist to improve performance and security posture through optimization and best practices adoption.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 74/100Medium28 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with bonfire.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 bonfire.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.