Skip to main content

Security report for citrons.xyz

Other · United States

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website citrons.xyz is a personal website belonging to an individual named raven, featuring journal entries, podcasts, galleries, and personal information. It serves as a personal publishing platform with a niche audience and does not represent a commercial business. The domain is privacy protected and registered since 2021, consistent with the website's personal nature. Technically, the site is built with basic HTML and CSS, hosted on Mythic Beasts servers, and shows moderate performance and basic mobile optimization. There is no evidence of CMS or advanced frameworks. Security posture is minimal with no detected security headers or HTTPS enforcement information, and no privacy or cookie policies are present. No contact or incident response information is provided, limiting transparency and trust. Overall, the site is safe for general audiences but lacks professional security and compliance features.

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. 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.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

  2. 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"

  3. 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 citrons.xyz

This scan found 26 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
52
Security headers
30
Email security
60
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
60

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 as a personal publishing platform without commercial intent or business partnerships. It targets a general audience interested in the author's personal content. There are no indications of revenue streams, partnerships, or business growth strategies. The domain registration is privacy protected, which is typical for personal sites. The absence of contact information and policies suggests limited business credibility. The site does not engage in advertising or analytics tracking, indicating a low commercial footprint.

Security posture

The security maturity of the website is low. There are no visible security headers, no published security or privacy policies, and no incident response contacts. DNSSEC is not enabled, which could improve domain security. The domain status includes transfer and update prohibitions, which is a positive security measure. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the content. The lack of HTTPS information limits full security assessment. Overall, the site would benefit from implementing standard security best practices and compliance documentation.

Recommendations

  1. Enable HTTPS and enforce secure connections site-wide.
  2. Implement DNSSEC to enhance domain security.
  3. Add standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security.
  4. Publish privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  5. Provide clear contact information and incident response channels.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Personal website of an individual named raven, sharing journal entries, podcasts, galleries, and personal information.
Key services
journal entries, podcast, gallery
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

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

Security

Observed score
30/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a personal site with basic content and navigation.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms policies found.
  3. No contact emails, phone numbers, or social media links detected.
  4. No security headers or advanced security measures detected.
  5. No analytics or advertising scripts detected.
  6. Domain is privacy protected and registered with a reputable registrar.
  7. Content is safe and suitable for general audiences.
  8. Website uses basic HTML and CSS with no detected CMS or frameworks.
  9. Hosting is via Mythic Beasts name servers.
  10. No forms or data collection mechanisms found.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses basic HTML and CSS without any detected JavaScript frameworks or CMS platforms. Hosting is provided via Mythic Beasts name servers. The site appears to have moderate performance and basic mobile responsiveness. There are no analytics or advertising scripts, which reduces tracking but also limits marketing insights. The absence of security headers and DNSSEC indicates technical debt in security configuration. The site structure is simple with clear navigation but lacks advanced SEO or accessibility features.
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 citrons.xyz. 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 citrons.xyz.

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.