Skip to main content

Security report for everstake.one

Private by Design, LLC · Technology · United States

Low risk. 2 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

85/100

Risk levelLow

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

Everstake is a prominent crypto staking service and validator platform serving over 735,000 users across more than 70 blockchain networks. Founded in 2018, it offers secure, automated, and non-custodial staking solutions with a strong emphasis on uptime and reliability. The company targets both retail and institutional clients, providing enterprise-grade node hosting and staking services. Technically, the website leverages modern frameworks such as Nuxt.js and Vue.js, hosted on Cloudflare and Azure infrastructure, ensuring good performance and mobile optimization. The security posture is robust, with HTTPS, security headers, and multiple certifications including GDPR, SOC 2, ISO 27001, and CPRA compliance. However, the site lacks publicly accessible privacy policy and terms of service pages, and no explicit contact or incident response information is found. Overall, the website demonstrates a mature digital presence with extensive analytics and advertising integrations, balanced with strong security practices.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
95/ 100 · Low
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

2 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. 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 everstake.one

This scan found 13 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
70
Email security
87
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
95
Average
85

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 everstake.one, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
60
Employees
0
Customers
59
Third parties
1
Weak passwords
3%

1 subdomain affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for everstake.one.

Select it in the checkout above.

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

Everstake holds a leading position in the crypto staking market, leveraging a business model focused on Proof-of-Stake blockchain protocols. Its competitive advantage lies in its large user base, broad network support, and enterprise-grade infrastructure. Revenue streams likely include staking fees and node hosting services. The company maintains a strong partnership ecosystem with wallet providers and blockchain projects. Growth indicators include a large staked value exceeding $6.5 billion and rewards paid over $700 million. The company emphasizes trust through certifications and uptime guarantees, appealing to both individual and institutional investors.

Security posture

The security maturity level of Everstake is high, supported by HTTPS enforcement, security headers, and recognized certifications such as ISO 27001 and SOC 2. The use of Cloudflare provides additional DDoS protection and bot mitigation. Cookie consent mechanisms comply with GDPR and CPRA, though the absence of a public privacy policy and incident response contacts is a compliance gap. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analysis. The company should consider publishing a security.txt file and explicit incident response contacts to enhance transparency and readiness.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC to strengthen DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Publish comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service documents accessible from the website footer.
  3. Add a security.txt file to facilitate vulnerability disclosures and incident reporting.
  4. Provide explicit contact information for security incidents (e.g., security@ or abuse@ email addresses).
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Private by Design, LLC
Description
Everstake is a crypto staking service and validator platform trusted by over 735K users across 70+ blockchain networks. It offers secure, automated, and non-custodial staking solutions with 99.9% uptime, targeting both retail and institutional clients.
Key services
crypto staking, node hosting, institutional staking, blockchain protocol support, data science services
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Nuxt.js, Vue.js, Cloudflare DNS, Google Tag Manager, CookieYes Consent Management, Hotjar, Google Analytics, Microsoft Application Insights, AdRoll, DoubleClick, Taboola, Yandex, Mixpanel
Frameworks
Nuxt.js, Vue.js
Platforms
Cloudflare, Azure
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Client transfer and delete prohibited domain status
  • Use of security cookies (e.g. __Secure-* cookies)
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented
  • Use of Cloudflare for DDoS protection and bot mitigation

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Hotjar, Mixpanel, Microsoft Application Insights
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
DoubleClick, AdRoll, Taboola, Rubicon Project, Yandex
Tracking pixels
Hotjar, Mixpanel, AdRoll, CookieYes
Marketing tools
CookieYes Consent Management
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Comprehensive cookie consent mechanism with detailed cookie categorization
  2. Use of multiple third-party analytics and advertising services
  3. Strong security posture with HTTPS and security headers
  4. Lack of publicly visible privacy policy and terms of service pages
  5. No explicit contact information or security incident response contacts found
  6. Certifications prominently displayed indicating compliance efforts
  7. Modern web technology stack with Nuxt.js and Vue.js
  8. Good mobile optimization and accessibility features
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern technology stack using Nuxt.js and Vue.js frameworks, hosted on Cloudflare and Azure platforms. It employs multiple analytics and advertising tools including Google Analytics, Hotjar, Mixpanel, and AdRoll, indicating a mature digital marketing strategy. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and accessibility features. The site uses a detailed cookie consent management system powered by CookieYes. Technical risks include reliance on multiple third-party scripts which require ongoing security monitoring. The absence of DNSSEC is a minor technical gap. Overall, the infrastructure supports a reliable and secure user experience.
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 everstake.one. 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 everstake.one.

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.