Skip to main content

Security report for ddf.org

Other · United States

Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

59/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website ddf.org is a parked domain primarily serving as a placeholder with advertising and a domain sale inquiry link. It does not represent an active business or service provider. The domain is long-registered since 2001 and uses privacy protection for the registrant. The technical infrastructure relies on basic HTML, CSS, JavaScript, and Google Adsense advertising integrated via Bodis domain parking services. There is no evidence of a CMS or advanced frameworks. Security posture is minimal with no visible security headers or HTTPS confirmation in the provided data. Privacy compliance is basic with a privacy policy page but no cookie consent mechanism. Business credibility is low due to lack of contact information or business details.

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

9 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

  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"

    • 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';…

  3. 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

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

Keep watching ddf.org

This scan found 26 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
60
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
59

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 domain appears to be held for sale or monetized through parking ads, targeting domain buyers or brokers. There is no active business operation or service offering. The market positioning is non-existent beyond domain resale. The business model is domain parking with revenue from advertising clicks. No partnerships or subsidiaries are indicated. The website lacks professional content or branding consistency, limiting its market presence and growth potential.

Security posture

Security maturity is low with no detected security policies, incident response contacts, or certifications. The absence of DNSSEC and security headers reduces domain and website security. No vulnerabilities or malware were detected, but the lack of HTTPS confirmation is a concern. The site does not collect user data via forms, reducing attack surface but also limiting user engagement. Compliance with GDPR or other data protection regulations is minimal.

Recommendations

  1. Enable HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate to secure user connections.
  2. Implement DNSSEC to protect against DNS spoofing and improve domain security.
  3. Add clear cookie consent mechanisms and update privacy policy to reflect GDPR compliance.
  4. Provide contact information and incident response details to improve trust and security posture.
  5. Consider developing original content and business information to enhance credibility and SEO.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
The website appears to be a parked domain with minimal content, primarily advertising that the domain may be for sale and displaying related search ads.
Key services
Domain sale inquiry
Content quality
poor
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, Google Adsense, Bodis domain parking
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
30/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Adsense, Bodis
Tracking pixels
Google Adsense cookie.js
Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website is a parked domain with minimal original content.
  2. Primary purpose is domain sale inquiry and displaying related ads.
  3. No contact information or business details provided.
  4. No security policies or incident response information found.
  5. No HTTPS or security headers information available from provided data.
  6. No forms or user input fields detected.
  7. No social media or external business links except advertising and Google services.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a simple static HTML structure with embedded Google Adsense scripts and Bodis domain parking services. There is no evidence of a CMS or modern JavaScript frameworks. Performance is likely moderate given minimal content but could be improved with optimization. Mobile optimization and accessibility are basic but functional. SEO is poor due to lack of meta tags beyond a basic description and no structured data. The hosting provider is Bodis, specializing in domain parking. Technical risks include lack of HTTPS confirmation and missing security headers.
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 ddf.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 ddf.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.