Skip to main content

Security report for factorcode.org

Stack Effects · Technology · United States

High risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

48/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Factorcode.org is the official website for the Factor programming language, an open source, concatenative, stack-based language developed and maintained by the organization Stack Effects based in the US. The site provides comprehensive information about the language's features, downloadable binaries for multiple platforms, source code access, and community engagement channels such as mailing lists, Discord, and IRC. The project has a niche but dedicated developer audience and maintains an active presence with regular stable and development releases. Technically, the website is straightforward, built with standard HTML and CSS, hosted via Cloudflare, and optimized moderately for performance and mobile devices. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled and domain transfer protection, but lacks DNSSEC and published security policies or incident response contacts. Privacy compliance is minimal, with no cookie or terms of service policies found. Overall, the site is trustworthy, professional, and focused on serving its developer community with open source resources and documentation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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. 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';…

  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

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

Keep watching factorcode.org

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
62
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
75
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
35
Average
48

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 Factor programming language project operates as a small technology entity focused on software development and community support. Its business model centers on open source distribution and community-driven development rather than commercial sales. The project targets programmers interested in concatenative and stack-based languages, offering binaries and source code for multiple platforms. The organization Stack Effects, registered in the US since 2005, aligns with the domain age and project maturity. The ecosystem includes active GitHub repositories, build farms, and social media engagement via Twitter. The lack of commercial contact information or monetization suggests a non-commercial or community-supported model. Strategic partnerships or subsidiaries are not evident, and the project maintains transparency through open source licensing and public documentation.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and domain transfer lock enabled, reducing risks of interception and unauthorized domain transfers. However, the absence of DNSSEC leaves the domain vulnerable to DNS spoofing attacks. No security headers were detected in the provided data, and no published security policy or incident response contacts are available, which limits transparency and readiness for security incidents. No forms or data collection mechanisms were found, reducing attack surface but also limiting user interaction. The site does not implement cookie consent or privacy policies, which may be a compliance gap under GDPR or similar regulations. Overall, the security posture is adequate for an informational open source project but could be improved with DNSSEC, security headers, and published policies.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Publish a formal security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
  3. Implement a cookie policy and consent mechanism to comply with privacy regulations.
  4. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  5. Consider adding contact information or a dedicated security contact email to facilitate communication.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Stack Effects
Description
Factor is a concatenative, stack-based programming language with high-level features including dynamic types, extensible syntax, macros, and garbage collection. It offers a full-featured library, supports multiple platforms, and is fully compiled for performance while supporting interactive development. The project is open source under a BSD license.
Key services
Programming language implementation, Binary releases for multiple OS/CPU platforms, Source code availability, Community support channels
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS
Platforms
Windows, macOS, Linux
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Domain status clientTransferProhibited

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges
  2. No privacy or cookie policies explicitly found except a BSD license file
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly listed on the main page
  4. Strong focus on open source programming language content
  5. Multiple community engagement channels linked
  6. No advertising or tracking technologies detected
  7. No security policy or incident response information published
  8. DNSSEC not enabled, which is a minor security gap
  9. Hosting via Cloudflare with domain transfer lock enabled
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a simple, clean HTML and CSS structure without heavy frameworks or CMS, which reduces complexity and potential vulnerabilities. Hosting is via Cloudflare, providing CDN and DDoS protection benefits. The site supports multiple platforms through downloadable binaries and source code repositories hosted on GitHub and other git services. Performance is moderate with basic mobile optimization and accessibility features. SEO is basic but sufficient for the niche audience. The lack of analytics or tracking scripts indicates minimal user tracking, aligning with privacy-conscious practices. Technical risks are low but could be mitigated further by adopting modern security headers and DNSSEC.
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 factorcode.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 factorcode.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.