Skip to main content

Security report for eagle.to

Mistachkin Systems · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

61/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Eagle Project website represents a small, specialized technology entity focused on the development and distribution of the Eagle scripting language, a member of the Tcl family. The project emphasizes security, sandboxing, and integration with the Common Language Runtime, targeting developers and technical users interested in scripting and secure runtime environments. The business model is community-driven with open source code repositories, downloadable binaries, and active community forums. The website content is technical and well-structured but lacks modern web features such as privacy policies and advanced security headers. Technically, the site is hosted by Hurricane Electric and built using older HTML standards with CSS styling. It supports multiple platforms including Windows and cross-platform runtimes like Mono and .NET Core. The site lacks modern CMS or analytics tools and shows basic mobile optimization and accessibility. Digitally signed executables and archives demonstrate good security practices for software distribution, although the website itself does not enforce HTTPS visibly or implement security headers. From a security perspective, the site shows strengths in code signing and authenticity verification but lacks published security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms. No forms or data collection points are present, reducing attack surface but also limiting user engagement. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates a gap in compliance with modern data protection regulations. Overall, the website is safe, professional, and trustworthy for its niche audience but would benefit from enhanced privacy compliance, security hardening, and improved technical modernization to increase its security posture and user trust.

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

8 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 eagle.to

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
67
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
61

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 eagle.to, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for eagle.to 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 Eagle Project occupies a niche position in the scripting language market, focusing on secure, extensible scripting for CLR integration. Its competitive advantage lies in its security sandbox and community-driven development model. Revenue streams appear limited or indirect, likely relying on community support and possibly consulting. The target customers are developers and organizations requiring secure scripting solutions. The project has a long history since 2007, with active community engagement through forums and contests. Partnerships include hosting by Hurricane Electric and use of Fossil SCM. Strategic observations suggest opportunities for growth through enhanced compliance, marketing, and modernization.

Security posture

The security maturity of the Eagle Project website is moderate. Key strengths include digitally signed executables and archives, which protect users from tampered downloads. However, the website lacks visible HTTPS enforcement, security headers, and published security policies or incident response contacts. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the content. The absence of forms reduces risk but also limits user interaction. Compliance with GDPR and other regulations is not evident. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a technical project site but requires improvements to meet modern standards and user expectations.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Implement HTTPS enforcement and add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Provide clear incident response and vulnerability disclosure information, including security contact emails.
  4. Enhance mobile optimization and accessibility to improve user experience across devices.
  5. Modernize the website's technical stack and SEO features to increase performance and visibility.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Mistachkin Systems
Description
Eagle is an extensible, adaptable generalized logic engine scripting language belonging to the Tcl family. It is designed as a glue language for integration with CLR systems, with security and sandboxing features, and can be used to write standalone applications and tools. The project is community-supported with open source repositories and ongoing contests.
Key services
Scripting language runtime, Secure sandbox environment, Community forums and events, Source code repositories and development tools
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
.NET Framework, .NET Core, Mono, Fossil SCM, HTML 4.01 Transitional, CSS
Frameworks
.NET Framework, .NET Core
Platforms
Windows, Cross-platform (via Mono and .NET Core)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
50/100
Good practices seen
  • Digitally signed executable files
  • Authenticity verification for archives

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 technical project site for an open source scripting language.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly provided on the main page.
  4. No social media links detected.
  5. No forms or data collection mechanisms present on the main page.
  6. Website uses older HTML 4.01 Transitional standard.
  7. Digitally signed executables and archives indicate good security practices for downloads.
  8. No visible security headers or HTTPS enforcement information in the HTML content.
  9. Hosting is provided by Hurricane Electric.
  10. Content is technical and safe for general audiences.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using legacy HTML 4.01 Transitional with CSS styling and hosts downloadable binaries primarily for Windows with .NET Framework dependencies. It supports cross-platform runtimes like Mono and .NET Core. The source code is managed via Fossil SCM with public repositories and mirrors. Hosting is provided by Hurricane Electric. The site lacks modern CMS, analytics, and tracking technologies, resulting in basic performance and SEO. Mobile optimization and accessibility are minimal but functional. The technical infrastructure is stable but would benefit from modernization to improve security, performance, and compliance.
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 eagle.to. 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 eagle.to.

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.