Skip to main content

Security report for fansly.com

Fansly · Media · N/a

Low risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

76/100

Risk levelLow

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

Fansly is an established adult content subscription platform founded in 2014, offering creators the ability to monetize content through subscriptions, livestreaming, and personal messaging. The platform targets an adults-only audience and positions itself competitively within the adult media subscription market. The website employs modern web technologies including Angular and integrates analytics and marketing tools such as Amplitude and Google Tag Manager. Hosting and DNS are managed via Cloudflare, ensuring reliable performance and security. The site enforces HTTPS and includes an age verification gate to restrict access to adult content. However, explicit contact emails and phone numbers are not publicly listed, with contact primarily via forms and help center links. Legal pages such as Privacy Policy and Terms of Service are present and comprehensive, supporting compliance with regulations including GDPR. Security posture is generally good with HTTPS and domain transfer protections, but lacks published security policies, incident response details, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms. Cookie consent mechanisms are not evident, indicating room for privacy compliance improvement.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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

4 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. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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

  3. 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 Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

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

Keep watching fansly.com

This scan found 20 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
82
Security headers
60
Email security
80
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
76

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

Fansly operates in the media and e-commerce sectors, focusing on adult content subscription services. Its business model revolves around content monetization for creators via subscriptions and interactive features like livestreaming and messaging. The platform has a consistent brand presence and leverages social media channels such as Twitter and Instagram for marketing. The domain age and registrar data support the legitimacy and maturity of the business. Fansly's ecosystem includes a help center and complaint process, indicating customer support infrastructure. The absence of explicit phone or email contacts suggests a preference for digital communication channels. The platform's market position is that of a significant player in adult subscription content, competing with similar services. No parent or subsidiary companies are identified from the data.

Security posture

Fansly demonstrates a solid security foundation with enforced HTTPS, Cloudflare DNS hosting, and domain transfer protection status. The presence of an age gate modal enforces access control for adult content. However, the website lacks visible security headers such as Content Security Policy or HSTS, and does not publish a dedicated security policy or incident response plan. There is no evidence of a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file. The use of modern frameworks and updated libraries reduces risk of vulnerabilities, but the absence of explicit security documentation and cookie consent mechanisms indicates gaps in privacy and security compliance. Overall, the security posture is good but could be enhanced by adopting best practices in security transparency and privacy compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive security policy and incident response plan accessible on the website.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner and detailed cookie policy to improve privacy compliance and GDPR adherence.
  3. Establish and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Enhance HTTP security headers including Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to strengthen defense.
  5. Improve accessibility features and provide explicit contact information for security and privacy inquiries to build trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Fansly
Description
Interact with your fans today and start selling content. Sign up today and make a free account.
Key services
Content subscription, Livestreaming, Personal messaging
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Angular (ng-version=19.1.2), Font Awesome 6 Pro, Google Tag Manager, Amplitude Analytics, Cloudflare DNS
Frameworks
Angular
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • ClientTransferProhibited domain status
  • Age verification modal

Analytics and tracking

Services
Amplitude, Google Analytics
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
Twitter Ads
Tracking pixels
Amplitude, Google Analytics (via GTM)
Marketing tools
Amplitude Analytics
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a mature adult content subscription platform
  2. Uses modern Angular framework and common analytics tools
  3. Has clear legal pages and age verification
  4. No explicit phone or email contacts found, contact via forms and help center
  5. No explicit cookie consent banner detected
  6. No published security policy or incident response info
  7. Good branding and consistent design
  8. No WAF or blocking detected
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Angular 19.1.2, indicating a modern and maintainable front-end framework. It uses Font Awesome 6 Pro for icons and integrates analytics tools such as Amplitude and Google Tag Manager for user behavior tracking. Hosting is managed via Cloudflare, providing DNS and CDN services. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and uses Google Fonts for typography. Performance is moderate with asynchronous loading of scripts. SEO is basic with meta tags and Open Graph data present but no advanced structured data like JSON-LD detected. The site lacks some accessibility features and security headers, which are areas for technical improvement. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid and supports a professional user experience but could benefit from enhanced security and privacy technical controls.
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 fansly.com. 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 fansly.com.

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.