Skip to main content

Security report for daysoftheyear.com

Days Of The Year · Media · N/a

Low risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

80/100

Risk levelLow

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

Days Of The Year is a media content website specializing in providing a comprehensive guide to worldwide holidays, events, and unique national observances. The site targets a broad audience interested in cultural, funny, and unusual holidays, leveraging content and advertising as its primary business model. The website is built on WordPress and utilizes modern web technologies including jQuery, Algolia for search, and multiple advertising networks such as Freestar and Google DoubleClick. SEO is well implemented with structured data and meta tags, enhancing discoverability and user engagement. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforced and no visible vulnerabilities, although explicit security policies are not publicly disclosed. The absence of WHOIS data for the domain introduces some uncertainty regarding domain legitimacy, but the website's content quality and social media presence support its credibility. Privacy and cookie policies are present and indicate GDPR compliance, though contact information is limited. Overall, the site demonstrates a mature digital presence with room for improvement in transparency and contact accessibility.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
70/ 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

4 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 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 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

  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 SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching daysoftheyear.com

This scan found 14 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
65
Email security
87
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
70
Average
80

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

The website occupies a niche in the media sector focused on holiday and event content, monetizing through advertising and possibly affiliate marketing. It maintains a consistent brand identity and targets general consumers interested in cultural and national holidays. The business model is content-driven with a medium-sized operational scale, founded around 2017. The presence of social media channels on Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn supports community engagement and brand awareness. The site leverages third-party services for analytics and advertising, indicating a standard digital marketing approach. Lack of explicit business registration or contact details on the site limits deeper business intelligence insights.

Security posture

The site enforces HTTPS and uses modern JavaScript libraries, contributing to a secure user experience. Security headers are implied but not explicitly confirmed in the HTML content. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected. However, the absence of published security policies or incident response contacts suggests limited transparency in security governance. The missing WHOIS data is a concern for domain trustworthiness but does not directly impact site security. Overall, the security posture is good but could benefit from enhanced policy disclosures and header implementations.

Recommendations

  1. Publish explicit security and incident response policies on the website to improve transparency and user trust.
  2. Implement and verify security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Provide clear and verified contact information including company emails and phone numbers for support and security reporting.
  4. Investigate and resolve the missing WHOIS data issue to enhance domain legitimacy and trust.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party libraries and advertising scripts to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Days Of The Year
Description
The ultimate guide to world’s weird, funny, wonderful, unknown and bizarre national holidays.
Key services
Holiday and event calendar, Content articles on special days, Advertising space
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, jQuery 3.7.1, Yoast SEO, Advanced Ads, Algolia, Google Analytics, Freestar Ads
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of modern JavaScript libraries

Analytics and tracking

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

Advertising

Ad networks
Freestar, Advanced Ads, Google DoubleClick
Marketing tools
Algolia Search
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content
  2. No WAF or security blocking detected
  3. WHOIS data unavailable, raising some legitimacy concerns
  4. Good SEO and structured data implementation
  5. Advertising and analytics scripts are present and standard
  6. No explicit contact emails or phone numbers found on main page
  7. Privacy and cookie policies are present and appear compliant
  8. No explicit security or incident response policies found
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress with a modern tech stack including jQuery 3.7.1, Algolia search integration, and advanced advertising solutions like Freestar and Advanced Ads. SEO is enhanced with Yoast SEO plugin and structured JSON-LD data. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and good accessibility features. Performance is moderate, with some external scripts for ads and analytics potentially impacting load times. No critical technical debt or outdated technologies were identified, but continuous monitoring of third-party dependencies is recommended to maintain security and performance.
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 daysoftheyear.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 daysoftheyear.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.