Skip to main content

Security report for cookie3.com

Cookie3 · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 2 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

75/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Cookie3 operates as a specialized SaaS platform offering a comprehensive crypto growth suite focused on tracking conversations, clicks, conversions, and community engagement within the blockchain ecosystem. The platform targets crypto projects, KOL campaigns, and community managers, providing data-driven insights to optimize marketing and engagement strategies. The website presents a professional and consistent brand image, highlighting key services such as business solutions, user analytics, KOL intelligence, and community activation, supported by a strategic partnership with Cookie DAO. Technically, the website is built on Webflow CMS, leveraging modern JavaScript libraries and CDN services to deliver a responsive and accessible user experience. While performance is moderate, the site is well-optimized for mobile devices and SEO. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enforced and some security best practices observed, including script integrity checks and cookie consent mechanisms. However, the absence of security headers and explicit privacy or terms policies indicates room for improvement. The security evaluation reveals no immediate vulnerabilities but highlights gaps in compliance documentation and incident response readiness. The lack of WHOIS data raises concerns about domain legitimacy, although the active and professional website presence suggests a legitimate operation. Overall, Cookie3 demonstrates a solid foundation in business and technical maturity but should enhance transparency and security governance to strengthen trust. Strategically, Cookie3 should prioritize publishing comprehensive privacy and security policies, implement security headers, and provide clear contact channels for support and incident response. These steps will improve compliance posture, user trust, and resilience against potential threats.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
73/ 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

2 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 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

  2. 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 Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

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

Keep watching cookie3.com

This scan found 20 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
72
Security headers
60
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
73
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

Cookie3 positions itself as a niche player in the crypto analytics and community engagement market, leveraging data-driven insights to empower blockchain projects and influencers. Its business model revolves around SaaS offerings with a focus on KOL campaign analysis, user analytics, and community activation tools. The partnership with Cookie DAO and the integration of the $COOKIE token indicate a growing ecosystem approach, enhancing market reach and user engagement. The company targets crypto projects and communities, a rapidly evolving and competitive sector, requiring continuous innovation and trust-building. The absence of detailed company registration and contact information suggests a startup or early-stage company, emphasizing the need for transparency to attract enterprise clients and partnerships.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses script integrity attributes, reflecting a baseline security awareness. The implementation of a cookie consent mechanism aligns with privacy best practices. However, the lack of detected security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options reduces the overall security posture. No explicit privacy policy, terms of service, or incident response information is published, indicating compliance gaps with GDPR and other regulations. The absence of vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files limits transparency and user confidence in security responsiveness. The missing WHOIS data is a red flag for domain legitimacy and ownership verification. Overall, the security posture is moderate but requires enhancements in policy publication, header implementation, and domain registration transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies clearly accessible on the website.
  2. Implement and configure security headers including CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection.
  3. Establish and publicize an incident response plan and vulnerability disclosure policy with dedicated contact channels.
  4. Verify and disclose domain registration details to improve legitimacy and trust.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and dependencies to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Cookie3
Description
Conversations, clicks, conversions. Every interaction and transaction, all in one platform. Track it all. From yaps to swaps, know what is driving results, which KOLs are pulling their weight, and activate your community. Data-driven insights, every step of the way.
Key services
Business Solutions, User Analytics, KOL Intelligence, Community Engagement, Ecosystem Exploration, $COOKIE Token, Cookie DAO
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Webflow, JavaScript, Splide.js, Finsweet Attributes, Finsweet Cookie Consent, CDN (jsdelivr.net)
Frameworks
Webflow CMS
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of integrity attribute on analytics script
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Custom analytics script from cdn.markfi.xyz
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
cookie3.analytics.min.js (custom analytics)
Marketing tools
Finsweet Attributes FormSubmit, Finsweet Cookie Consent
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenge.
  2. No WHOIS data available, indicating possible privacy protection or unregistered domain.
  3. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service pages found.
  4. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented via Finsweet.
  5. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on the site.
  6. Website uses modern Webflow CMS and JavaScript libraries.
  7. Security headers not detected in provided data; recommend adding.
  8. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information published.
  9. Content is focused on crypto growth analytics and community engagement.
  10. No adult or NSFW content detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using Webflow CMS, leveraging modern JavaScript libraries such as Splide.js and Finsweet attributes for enhanced UI and form handling. Hosting is provided by Webflow's infrastructure with CDN support from jsdelivr.net and other providers, ensuring moderate performance and good mobile optimization. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and Open Graph data, enhancing social media sharing and search visibility. Accessibility features such as focus-visible outlines and responsive design are implemented, contributing to a positive user experience. However, the site lacks advanced security headers and explicit compliance documentation, which are critical for technical maturity and regulatory adherence. The technical stack is modern and appropriate for the business model but requires ongoing security and compliance improvements.
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 cookie3.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 cookie3.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.