Skip to main content

Security report for cnr.sh

Domain Protection Services, Inc. · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

64/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website cnr.sh is a personal professional site for Chris Riccomini, a software engineer, author, and investor. It serves as a platform to share blog posts, talks, and information about his investment fund and open source projects. The site targets software developers, investors, and the tech community, positioning itself as a niche personal brand with a focus on technology and early-stage investing. The business model revolves around personal branding, content sharing, and promoting investment activities. Technically, the site uses modern web technologies including HTML5, CSS3, Google Fonts, FontAwesome, and the htmx JavaScript library. It is hosted on infrastructure associated with Name.com, with moderate performance and good mobile optimization. SEO practices are well implemented, though accessibility is basic. Analytics are minimal, using Tinylytics for lightweight tracking. From a security perspective, the site benefits from HTTPS and domain transfer protection but lacks DNSSEC and security headers. There are no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data. However, the absence of privacy, cookie, and security policies, as well as contact information for incident response, indicates compliance and transparency gaps. Overall, the website is trustworthy and professional but would benefit from enhanced privacy compliance and security best practices. The risk level is low given the nature of the content and absence of sensitive data, but improvements in policy publication and security headers are recommended.

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

7 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 cnr.sh

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
95
Security headers
15
Email security
55
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
64

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 site represents a personal brand with a clear focus on software engineering and early-stage investing. The business model is content-driven with ancillary investment fund promotion. The target audience includes developers, tech investors, and open source enthusiasts. The presence of published works, social profiles, and investment fund links indicates a well-rounded professional presence. The site leverages partnerships with platforms like AngelList and Amazon for affiliate and investment visibility. Growth potential is tied to personal reputation and community engagement rather than direct commercial transactions.

Security posture

Security maturity is moderate. HTTPS is enforced, and domain transfer is locked, which are positive indicators. However, the lack of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security reduces the overall security posture. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, limiting transparency and preparedness. The site does not collect sensitive user data via forms, reducing risk exposure. Privacy compliance is weak due to missing policies and consent mechanisms. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a personal site but should be improved for compliance and trust.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve GDPR compliance and user trust.
  3. Implement security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  4. Add a security.txt file or vulnerability disclosure policy to facilitate responsible reporting.
  5. Provide clear contact information for security incidents and general inquiries to enhance transparency.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Domain Protection Services, Inc.
Description
Personal website of Chris Riccomini, a software engineer, author, and investor. The site features posts, talks, and links to his projects, investments, and social profiles.
Key services
Blog posts, Talks, Newsletter subscription, Investment fund information, Open source project promotion
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, Google Fonts (Share Tech Mono), FontAwesome, htmx.org (v2.0.4), Tinylytics analytics
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Domain status clientTransferProhibited

Analytics and tracking

Services
Tinylytics
Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Tinylytics
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a personal professional site for Chris Riccomini, focusing on software engineering, investing, and open source.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found, indicating compliance gaps.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly provided on the site.
  4. No security policy or incident response information published.
  5. Modern frontend technologies used with good SEO and mobile optimization.
  6. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.
  7. External links are mostly to reputable technology and social platforms.
  8. Minimal tracking via Tinylytics; no aggressive user tracking observed.
  9. No signs of suspicious or malicious content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with standard modern web technologies and uses external resources such as Google Fonts and FontAwesome for styling and icons. The use of htmx indicates some dynamic content loading capabilities without heavy JavaScript frameworks. Hosting is via Name.com, consistent with the WHOIS data. Performance is moderate with no major issues detected. SEO is well addressed with meta tags and Open Graph data. Accessibility is basic but could be improved. No CMS detected, indicating a likely static or custom-built site. The technical stack is appropriate for a personal professional site with low complexity and risk.
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 cnr.sh. 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 cnr.sh.

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.