Skip to main content

Security report for calm.com

Other · N/a

Low risk. 4 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view.

Security score

83/100

Risk levelLow

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

The website calm.com is currently inaccessible due to a PerimeterX Web Application Firewall (WAF) security challenge page that blocks access to the actual content. This prevents extraction of any meaningful business, contact, or policy information from the site. The domain is registered with Moniker Online Services LLC since 1995, indicating a long-standing and legitimate registration. DNSSEC is not enabled, which is a minor security gap. Hosting appears to be on Amazon AWS infrastructure. Due to the WAF blocking, no metadata, forms, or scripts beyond the security challenge are visible, limiting the ability to assess the website's technical maturity or business model. The content safety rating is safe as no adult or explicit content is present in the challenge page.

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

4 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: Google APIs

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

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

Keep watching calm.com

This scan found 11 issues across 5 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
100
Security headers
85
Email security
100
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
83

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

No business intelligence data could be extracted from the blocked content. The domain age and registrar information suggest a mature and legitimate business presence. Without access to the actual website content, no insights into market positioning, services, or partnerships can be determined.

Security posture

The presence of a PerimeterX WAF indicates a proactive security posture to mitigate automated attacks and bots. However, no security headers or SSL configuration details were available for review. DNSSEC is not enabled, which could be improved. The blocking of content limits visibility into other security practices such as incident response or vulnerability disclosure.

Recommendations

  1. Allow controlled access or provide a public version of the website content for security and compliance analysis.
  2. Enable DNSSEC to enhance DNS security.
  3. Publish and make accessible privacy, cookie, and security policies to improve transparency and compliance.
  4. Implement and expose security headers to improve security posture.
  5. Provide clear contact and incident response information publicly to enhance trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. Page content is a PerimeterX captcha security challenge blocking access to the actual website content. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor

Technology

Stack
PerimeterX

Analytics and tracking

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website content is blocked by a PerimeterX WAF security challenge.
  2. No actual website content, metadata, or business information is accessible.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found in the provided HTML.
  4. No contact information or forms detected.
  5. Domain WHOIS data indicates a long-established domain with no privacy protection.
  6. DNSSEC is not enabled, which could be improved for DNS security.
  7. Hosting appears to be on AWS infrastructure based on DNS nameservers.
  8. No security headers or SSL configuration details available from provided data.
  9. No analytics or advertising scripts detected in the blocked content.
  10. Content safety is rated safe as no adult or explicit content is present.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses PerimeterX for bot mitigation and is hosted on AWS infrastructure as indicated by DNS nameservers. No CMS or other frameworks could be identified due to content blocking. The lack of accessible metadata and content prevents assessment of SEO, accessibility, or performance. The technical implementation cannot be fully evaluated without access to the actual site content.
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 calm.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 calm.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.