Skip to main content

Security report for corz.org

corz.org · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

75/100

Risk levelMedium

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

corz.org is an independent technology-focused website operated by a small entity since 2000, offering a variety of software tools, tutorials, and resources primarily targeting developers, webmasters, and tech enthusiasts. The site provides Windows software utilities, web server tools, networking guides, and creative content such as images and mandalas. It operates on a donation-supported model with free access to its resources. Technically, the site is custom-built using PHP, JavaScript, HTML5, and CSS3, with a fast-loading and well-structured design, though mobile optimization and accessibility are basic. Security-wise, HTTPS is enabled and standard tracking tools like Google Analytics are used, but the site lacks advanced security headers and explicit privacy or security policies. Overall, the site is trustworthy with a moderate security posture but would benefit from enhanced compliance and security practices.

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

5 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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

  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

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics

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

  3. 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 corz.org

This scan found 18 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
59
Security headers
70
Email security
88
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention corz.org, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
2
Employees
0
Customers
2
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
100%

1 subdomain affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for corz.org.

Select it in the checkout above.

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

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 occupies a niche market as a long-standing independent developer and content creator, with a loyal user base attracted by unique tools and tutorials. Its business model relies on free software distribution and voluntary donations. The site leverages affiliate partnerships for additional revenue streams. The target audience includes developers, IT professionals, and hobbyists interested in Windows utilities, web server management, and networking. The absence of formal privacy and security policies suggests an informal operational approach, typical of small independent sites. The site’s longevity and user testimonials indicate a stable presence, though growth and modernization opportunities exist.

Security posture

The security posture of corz.org is moderate. HTTPS is properly implemented, and no sensitive data is exposed in the HTML content. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options reduces protection against common web attacks. There is no visible incident response or vulnerability disclosure information, which limits transparency and readiness. The cookie consent mechanism is present but basic. The use of Google Analytics and Tag Manager introduces moderate user tracking, which should be balanced with privacy compliance. Overall, the site would benefit from adopting recognized security frameworks and publishing clear security policies.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and terms of service pages to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Add essential security headers (CSP, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to enhance protection.
  3. Publish incident response and vulnerability disclosure information to increase transparency and readiness.
  4. Improve mobile responsiveness and accessibility to broaden user reach and comply with standards.
  5. Review and optimize user tracking practices to align with GDPR and privacy best practices.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
corz.org
Description
Maker of tools, troubleshooter, creator of creative solutions. Art that is code that is art. Tech output, software, web site spare-parts, design, micro-controllers (ESP32 focus), original .htaccess tutorials, hacking, comments, and more. Quietly serving since last century from Granite City.
Key services
Windows software tools, Web server tools and tutorials, Networking guides, Imaging and wallpaper galleries, Download engine, Security and server utilities
Content quality
good
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
PHP, JavaScript, HTML5, CSS3
Platforms
Windows (software focus), Web (Apache likely)
Performance
fast
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of Google Analytics with nonce scripts
  • Cookie notice with consent mechanism

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a personal/independent tech site with a focus on software tools and tutorials.
  2. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service found, which is a compliance gap.
  3. Cookie notice is present with a consent mechanism.
  4. Contact is available via a contact page but no direct emails or phone numbers found.
  5. Use of Google Analytics and Tag Manager indicates moderate user tracking.
  6. No security headers detected; HTTPS is enabled but security posture can be improved.
  7. Website content is rich and diverse, including software, tutorials, images, and blogs.
  8. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected; site fully accessible.
  9. Affiliate links and partner programs are present but clearly marked.
  10. No social media links or phone numbers explicitly found.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a custom technology stack using PHP, JavaScript, HTML5, and CSS3 without reliance on common CMS platforms. It demonstrates good performance with fast page generation times and well-structured navigation. The site uses Google Analytics and Tag Manager for analytics and tracking. While the design is consistent and professional, mobile optimization and accessibility features are basic and could be improved. The hosting provider is not explicitly identified. The site includes a variety of downloadable software and tools, indicating a mature backend infrastructure. Technical debt appears low, but modernization in security and compliance is recommended.
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 corz.org. 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 corz.org.

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.