Skip to main content

Security report for doip.rocks

Technology · N/a

High risk. 10 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

45/100

Risk levelHigh

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

The website js.doip.rocks serves as the documentation portal for doip.js, an open source JavaScript library designed to verify decentralized online identities. The project is community-driven and funded by foundations such as NLnet and NGI0, with active presence on platforms like Codeberg and Mastodon. The site targets developers and contributors interested in decentralized identity verification technologies. The business model revolves around open source collaboration and community support rather than commercial sales. Technically, the website uses standard web technologies including JavaScript, HTML5, CSS, and integrates openpgp.js for cryptographic functions. The documentation is generated using JSDoc and styled with docdash. The site supports both Node.js and browser environments. Performance and mobile optimization are basic but functional, with no detected CMS or advanced frameworks. External links connect to reputable open source and community platforms. From a security perspective, the site lacks visible security headers and explicit SSL/TLS configuration details in the provided data. No forms or user input fields are present, reducing attack surface. However, absence of privacy and cookie policies, as well as contact information for security incidents, indicates gaps in compliance and incident response readiness. The WHOIS data is malformed and unavailable, which reduces domain trustworthiness despite the professional and transparent nature of the project. Overall, the website is a safe, niche technical resource with moderate trustworthiness. Strategic improvements in privacy compliance, security headers, and domain registration transparency would enhance its security posture and business credibility.

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

10 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 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

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

Keep watching doip.rocks

This scan found 28 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
52
Security headers
15
Email security
40
DNS health
70
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
50
Average
45

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 doip.rocks, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for doip.rocks right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

Monitor on Breach (opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

The doip.js project occupies a niche in the decentralized identity verification market, leveraging open source development and community engagement as its core competitive advantages. Its business model is non-commercial, relying on foundation funding and community sponsorships. The target audience includes developers, open source contributors, and privacy-conscious users. The project maintains a transparent development process with public repositories and documentation. Partnerships with platforms like Codeberg and Open Collective support sustainability. Growth indicators include active issue tracking and community involvement. The ecosystem is primarily technical and community-driven, with no evident commercial subsidiaries or parent companies.

Security posture

The current security maturity level is basic. The website does not expose sensitive data and lacks user input forms, which reduces immediate risk. However, the absence of security headers and privacy policies indicates compliance gaps, particularly with GDPR and related regulations. Incident response mechanisms and contact channels for security issues are not provided, limiting readiness. The malformed WHOIS data raises concerns about domain registration transparency and potential risks. No vulnerabilities or malware indicators were detected in the content. Overall, the security culture appears informal and focused on open source best practices rather than formal enterprise security frameworks.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate and verify configuration using tools like SSL Labs.
  2. Add standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection.
  3. Publish clear privacy and cookie policies to improve GDPR compliance and user trust.
  4. Provide contact information specifically for security incidents and abuse reporting to improve incident response readiness.
  5. Regularly audit dependencies and update libraries to mitigate vulnerabilities and maintain security hygiene.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
doip.js allows websites and Node.js projects to verify decentralized online identities.
Key services
Verification of decentralized online identities, JavaScript library for Node.js and browser, Documentation and community support
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, openpgp.js, JSDoc, HTML5, CSS
Platforms
Node.js, Browser
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
50/100
Good practices seen
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No forms or inputs detected

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a documentation portal for an open source JavaScript library (doip.js) related to decentralized identity verification.
  2. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses found on the site.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies detected.
  4. No forms or data collection mechanisms present.
  5. No security headers or SSL configuration details available from provided data.
  6. External links point to reputable open source and community platforms.
  7. No advertising or tracking technologies detected.
  8. Content is technical and safe for general audiences.
  9. WHOIS data is missing or inaccessible, limiting domain trust assessment.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using a straightforward tech stack centered on JavaScript and openpgp.js for cryptographic operations. Documentation is generated with JSDoc and styled with the docdash theme. The site supports both Node.js and browser usage scenarios. Performance is moderate with basic mobile optimization and accessibility features. There is no detected CMS or advanced frameworks, indicating low technical debt but also limited scalability features. External dependencies are minimal and focused on open source libraries. Opportunities exist to modernize the tech stack with enhanced accessibility and SEO optimizations, as well as improved security configurations.
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 doip.rocks. 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 doip.rocks.

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.