Skip to main content

Security report for elliott.diy

Elliott · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

67/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Elliott.diy is a personal website operated by an individual named Elliott, focused on cybersecurity, reverse engineering, and related technical experiments. The site serves as a blog and project showcase targeting cybersecurity enthusiasts and researchers. The content is well-structured, with recent blog posts on relevant security topics such as remote code execution and malware tracking. Technically, the site is built using the Astro static site generator, hosted with Cloudflare DNS, and employs modern web technologies ensuring good performance and mobile optimization. Security posture is solid with HTTPS enforced and domain transfer protection enabled, though DNSSEC is not enabled and security headers are missing. Privacy compliance is weak due to the absence of privacy and cookie policies. Contact information is limited to an email address and social media links. Overall, the site is trustworthy and professional for a personal technical blog but could improve compliance and security best practices.

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

7 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 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';…

  2. 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

    • 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

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

Keep watching elliott.diy

This scan found 22 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
40
Email security
75
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
67

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 positions itself as a niche personal blog in the cybersecurity domain, focusing on malware analysis, CTF design, and internet infrastructure experimentation. The business model is non-commercial, centered on knowledge sharing and community engagement. The target audience includes cybersecurity students, hobbyists, and researchers. The site demonstrates consistent branding and quality content, with active blog updates indicating ongoing engagement. There are no indications of commercial partnerships or revenue streams. The use of reputable registrar and DNS providers supports operational stability. The lack of formal business information and policies aligns with the personal nature of the site.

Security posture

The security posture is generally good with HTTPS enabled and domain status set to clientTransferProhibited, reducing risk of unauthorized domain transfers. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security reduces defense in depth. No forms or user input fields are present, minimizing attack surface. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is provided, which could hinder coordinated security communication. The site uses a self-hosted analytics script, limiting third-party data exposure. Overall, the site is secure for its purpose but could enhance security policies and headers to improve resilience and compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC to strengthen DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement standard security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy to improve GDPR compliance and user trust.
  4. Add a security.txt file or dedicated vulnerability disclosure page to facilitate responsible reporting.
  5. Consider adding incident response contact channels such as security@ or abuse@ email addresses.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Elliott
Description
A personal site for experiments in cybersecurity, reverse engineering, and whatever breaks along the way. The site shares projects, ideas, and interesting content related to cybersecurity, malware analysis, CTF design, and internet infrastructure experimentation.
Key services
Cybersecurity research, Malware analysis, CTF design, Technical blogging
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Astro v5.16.7, Cloudflare DNS, JavaScript, CSS, Web Fonts (Reddit Mono)
Frameworks
Astro
Performance
fast
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Domain status clientTransferProhibited
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No vulnerable libraries detected

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
track.elliott.diy
Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a personal blog focused on cybersecurity and reverse engineering.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. Contact email provided in footer: hey@elliott.diy
  4. No phone numbers or physical addresses found.
  5. No forms detected on the homepage HTML.
  6. Uses modern static site generator Astro with Cloudflare DNS.
  7. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure page found.
  8. Minimal tracking via self-hosted analytics script.
  9. No advertising or affiliate marketing detected.
  10. Good mobile and accessibility support.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with Astro v5.16.7, a modern static site generator, ensuring fast load times and good performance. It uses Cloudflare DNS, which is a reputable provider, though DNSSEC is not enabled. The site employs custom fonts and CSS with responsive design, providing good mobile optimization and accessibility. No CMS or dynamic backend detected, reducing complexity and attack surface. The presence of a self-hosted analytics script indicates attention to privacy. No broken links or errors were detected in the HTML content. Overall, the technical implementation is modern, efficient, and well-maintained with opportunities to enhance security headers and DNS configuration.
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 elliott.diy. 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 elliott.diy.

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.