Skip to main content

Security report for com.com

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

69/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website com.com is currently inaccessible to general users due to a Cloudflare security challenge (Turnstile captcha) that requires human verification before access. This indicates the presence of a Web Application Firewall (WAF) protecting the site, which blocks automated access and potentially malicious traffic. The domain itself is very old, registered since 1995 via GoDaddy.com, LLC, and is not privacy protected, which suggests legitimacy in domain registration. However, the website content is minimal and does not provide any business-related information, contact details, or policies, limiting the ability to assess the business or its market position. Technically, the site uses Cloudflare services for security and performance but lacks DNSSEC and security headers, which are recommended for enhanced security.

Scanned

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

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

8 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 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

    • 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

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

Keep watching com.com

This scan found 16 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
55
Email security
65
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
69

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

Due to the lack of accessible content, no business intelligence data such as company name, services, market position, or target audience can be determined. The domain's age suggests it could be a legacy or parked domain, but without content or contact information, no conclusions about business operations or partnerships can be drawn. No social media or external business links are present, and no advertising or analytics tools are detected, indicating minimal digital marketing or tracking activity.

Security posture

The security posture shows some strengths such as HTTPS enabled and domain status prohibiting unauthorized changes. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers reduces the overall security robustness. The presence of a Cloudflare WAF challenge is a positive security control to mitigate automated threats. No visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data are detected, but the lack of security and privacy policies is a compliance gap. Incident response and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are not found, indicating limited transparency in security management.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement standard security headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to enhance browser security.
  3. Publish clear privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  4. Provide visible contact information and business details to enhance credibility and user engagement.
  5. Consider adding a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to demonstrate security transparency.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Cloudflare detected. Website content is blocked by Cloudflare security challenge (Turnstile captcha) requiring human verification before access. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Stack
Cloudflare Turnstile, JavaScript, HTML5, CSS3
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
55/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Domain status clientDeleteProhibited, clientRenewProhibited, clientTransferProhibited, clientUpdateProhibited

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is currently blocked by Cloudflare Turnstile captcha challenge.
  2. No visible business content or contact information on the landing page.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  4. No forms or data collection mechanisms detected.
  5. No social media or external business links found except Cloudflare domains.
  6. WHOIS data shows domain is old and registered with GoDaddy without privacy protection.
  7. DNSSEC is not enabled, which is a security improvement opportunity.
  8. Website uses Cloudflare for security and performance.
  9. No SEO or accessibility optimizations detected.
  10. Website content quality is poor due to lack of accessible content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website relies on Cloudflare for hosting and security, using modern JavaScript and CSS technologies. The performance is moderate given the security challenge delay. The site is mobile responsive at a basic level but lacks SEO optimization and accessibility features. No CMS or advanced frameworks are detected. The technical implementation is minimal, likely due to the site being a security challenge landing page rather than a full website. There is an opportunity to modernize and improve technical infrastructure once the site content is accessible.
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. 69/100 +1Medium24 findingsView report
  2. 68/100Medium26 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with com.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 com.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.