Skip to main content

Security report for davidrevoy.com

David Revoy · Other · N/a

High risk. 11 critical or high findings in Network security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

43/100

Risk levelHigh

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

David Revoy is an independent artist and instructor specializing in digital illustration using exclusively Free/Libre and Open-Source software since 2009. The website serves as a portfolio, blog, tutorial repository, and patronage platform, targeting artists and open-source enthusiasts. The business model relies on freelance work and community support via Patreon, Liberapay, Tipeee, and donations. The site maintains a consistent brand and high-quality content, positioning itself as a niche leader in open-source digital art education. Technically, the website is built on the PluXml CMS, utilizing standard HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript. It demonstrates good mobile optimization and SEO practices but lacks visible advanced security headers and cookie consent mechanisms. No analytics or tracking scripts were detected, indicating a privacy-conscious approach. The absence of WHOIS data for the domain is a notable anomaly, though the site content and social media presence suggest legitimacy. From a security perspective, the site shows moderate maturity with no exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries detected. However, the lack of explicit security headers and cookie consent reduces compliance with modern privacy regulations such as GDPR. Incident response and security policies are not publicly documented. Overall, the site is safe and trustworthy but could improve its security posture and privacy compliance. The overall risk is moderate with recommendations to enhance security headers, implement cookie consent, clarify privacy policies, and investigate the domain registration status to improve trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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

11 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: Telnet

      Port 23 (Telnet) is publicly accessible - Telnet - Unencrypted remote access

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to Telnet using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: RDP

      Port 3389 (RDP) is publicly accessible - RDP - Remote Desktop, prime ransomware target

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to RDP using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: PostgreSQL

      Port 5432 (PostgreSQL) is publicly accessible - PostgreSQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to PostgreSQL using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

  2. 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"

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

Keep watching davidrevoy.com

This scan found 29 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
42
Security headers
20
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
53
Average
43

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 · found on this site
  • 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

David Revoy operates as a small independent creative business focused on digital art and education within the open-source software community. The business leverages multiple revenue streams including freelance commissions, tutorial content, and patronage platforms. Its competitive advantage lies in its niche specialization and strong community engagement. The website acts as a central hub linking to social media and patronage sites, fostering a loyal audience. Growth indicators include frequent blog updates and active social media channels. Partnerships appear limited but include related projects like Pepper & Carrot webcomic. The business model is sustainable for a small creative professional but lacks corporate scale or diversification.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic to moderate security posture. HTTPS is assumed but not explicitly confirmed in the HTML content. No security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, or X-Frame-Options were detected, which are recommended best practices. No forms or input fields are present, reducing attack surface. No incident response or security policy information is published. The absence of cookie consent and privacy compliance mechanisms is a gap given the EU audience relevance. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found in the HTML. Overall, the security maturity is adequate for a small personal site but improvements are needed for compliance and defense in depth.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce HTTPS with visible indicators and HSTS header.
  2. Add comprehensive security headers including CSP, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Deploy a cookie consent banner/mechanism to comply with GDPR and other privacy laws.
  4. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information.
  5. Investigate and clarify domain WHOIS registration details to improve trust and legitimacy.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
David Revoy
Description
Website of David Revoy (aka Deevad), artist and instructor using only Free/Libre and Open-Source software since 2009.
Key services
Digital art portfolio, Art tutorials, Brushes and extras, Webcomic publishing, Patronage and donations
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript
Frameworks
PluXml CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
60/100
Good practices seen
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No visible vulnerable libraries

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and active blog
  2. No WHOIS data available, which is unusual for a .com domain
  3. No visible security headers or explicit HTTPS enforcement in HTML
  4. No cookie consent mechanism detected despite EU GDPR relevance
  5. Social media presence is strong and consistent
  6. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly listed on main pages
  7. No forms detected in HTML content
  8. No analytics or tracking scripts detected in provided HTML
  9. Website uses PluXml CMS, a lightweight open-source CMS
  10. Content is focused on art, tutorials, and open-source software advocacy
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses PluXml CMS, a lightweight open-source platform, with standard web technologies (HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript). The site is well-structured with good SEO meta tags and Open Graph metadata for social sharing. Mobile responsiveness is good, and navigation is clear and user-friendly. No modern JavaScript frameworks or analytics tools were detected, indicating a simple and privacy-focused technical stack. Performance is moderate, likely due to image-heavy content but no explicit performance optimizations were identified. Accessibility features are basic and could be enhanced. The lack of security headers and cookie consent mechanisms are technical debt areas. Hosting provider and SSL configuration details are not visible from the HTML.
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 davidrevoy.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 davidrevoy.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.