Skip to main content

Security report for cyrneko.eu

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 11 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Email security and 2 other checks.

Security score

53/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website 'Alexia's Webplace' serves as a personal online presence for an individual named Alexia, who is active in various online communities such as the Fediverse, Bluesky, and open source projects. The site provides contact information primarily through modern decentralized communication platforms like Signal, XMPP, and Matrix, and offers links to code repositories and a blog. The business model is personal and community-focused, relying on donations via Ko-Fi, GitHub Sponsors, and Monero wallet contributions. The website targets a general audience interested in social and open-source communities. Technically, the site is built with standard HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript, using modern web fonts and CSS variables for styling. The site appears to be hosted under a domain registered with Porkbun LLC, a reputable registrar. The site is moderately optimized for mobile and accessibility, though no advanced frameworks or CMS are detected. Performance is moderate with no evident analytics or tracking scripts, indicating a privacy-conscious approach. From a security perspective, the site lacks explicit security headers and does not provide privacy or cookie policies, which limits compliance with GDPR and other privacy regulations. No forms collect sensitive data, reducing risk exposure. There is no vulnerability disclosure or incident response information, which could be improved to enhance transparency and trust. The domain registration data is consistent with the website content, and no suspicious patterns are detected. Overall, the website is safe, well-structured, and serves its purpose as a personal web presence. However, it would benefit from adding privacy and cookie policies, security headers, and incident response information to improve compliance and security posture.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
10/ 100 · Critical
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

11 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.

    • Critical

      EU business without adequate privacy measures

      EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

      What to do: Implement comprehensive GDPR compliance including privacy policy, cookie consent, and data protection measures

  2. 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

  3. 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';…

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

Keep watching cyrneko.eu

This scan found 25 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
20
Email security
40
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
10
Average
53

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

Alexia's Webplace operates as a personal and community engagement platform rather than a commercial business. Its market positioning is niche, targeting users within decentralized social networks and open-source communities. The business model is donation-based, with revenue streams from Ko-Fi, GitHub Sponsors, and cryptocurrency contributions. The target audience includes tech-savvy individuals interested in privacy, social justice, and open-source projects. The site leverages partnerships with community projects like The Starlight Network. Growth indicators are limited due to the personal nature of the site, but the presence on multiple platforms suggests active engagement. The lack of formal business information and certifications aligns with its personal use case.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic security posture with no evident vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data. The absence of security headers and privacy policies indicates gaps in security best practices and regulatory compliance. The use of decentralized communication platforms for contact reduces reliance on traditional email, potentially lowering spam and phishing risks. However, the lack of incident response contacts and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms limits the site's readiness to handle security incidents. Overall, the security maturity is low to moderate, suitable for a personal site but insufficient for commercial or sensitive data handling.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a privacy policy and cookie policy to improve GDPR compliance and user trust.
  2. Add standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Establish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to provide transparency and a channel for security researchers.
  4. Include explicit contact information for security incidents or abuse reports to improve incident response readiness.
  5. Consider integrating basic analytics with privacy-respecting configurations to monitor site performance and user engagement.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Personal website of Alexia, sharing contact info, links to social profiles, projects, blog, and donation options.
Key services
Personal blogging, Code repositories, Social media presence, Community projects
Content quality
good
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, Inter font (rsms.me/inter), Signal link, XMPP, Matrix
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • No forms collecting sensitive data
  • No exposed credentials or sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Personal website with clear contact and social links
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms policies found
  3. No forms collecting personal data
  4. No security headers detected in provided data
  5. No analytics or tracking scripts detected
  6. Content is safe and suitable for general audiences
  7. Website uses modern fonts and CSS variables for styling
  8. No explicit business or commercial entity information provided
  9. No security incident or vulnerability disclosure information present
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a simple, clean technical stack with HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript, leveraging modern web fonts and CSS variables for dynamic styling. No CMS or complex frameworks are detected, indicating low technical debt and ease of maintenance. Hosting details are limited to registrar information, with no explicit hosting provider identified. Performance is moderate, with no heavy scripts or tracking technologies detected, contributing to fast load times. Mobile optimization is good, but accessibility features are basic and could be enhanced. SEO optimization is minimal, with no Open Graph or structured data present. Overall, the technical implementation is solid for a personal site but could be improved with enhanced accessibility and SEO 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 cyrneko.eu. 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 cyrneko.eu.

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.