Skip to main content

Security report for farktography.net

Other · N/a

High risk. 6 critical or high findings in Network security, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

49/100

Risk levelHigh

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

The website 'www.farktography.com' is a WordPress-based community platform focused on 'Farktography', likely a photography-related forum or parody community. It offers forums and blog content to engage users interested in this niche. The site uses common web technologies such as WordPress CMS, Bootstrap framework, jQuery, and Font Awesome icons, indicating a standard modern web infrastructure. The site is accessible over HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate, ensuring secure communication. However, the absence of privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies, as well as lack of contact information, limits its compliance and trustworthiness. The WHOIS data is unavailable or indicates the domain is unregistered, which raises legitimacy concerns despite the active website content. Overall, the site provides basic community services but lacks comprehensive business and security policies.

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

6 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
  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

  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 farktography.net

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
67
Security headers
90
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
50
Average
59
After the cap
49

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 · found on this site
  • 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 farktography.net, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for farktography.net 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 site targets photography enthusiasts or community members interested in 'Farktography'. Its business model centers on community engagement through forums and blogs. The presence of a partner domain 'www.bibliostats.com' suggests some ecosystem or related service integration. The site appears small in scale with basic content quality and moderate branding consistency. There are no visible revenue streams, certifications, or trust indicators. The lack of detailed business information and contact data limits its credibility and market positioning.

Security posture

Security posture is moderate with HTTPS enabled and no obvious vulnerabilities detected in the HTML content. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and others reduces the site's defense-in-depth. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are present. The site does not appear to use analytics or tracking scripts, which reduces privacy risks but also limits monitoring capabilities. The missing WHOIS data and domain registration inconsistencies pose a risk to trust and legitimacy. Overall, the site should improve security best practices and compliance documentation.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish privacy and cookie policies to improve legal compliance and user trust.
  2. Add contact information including company emails and phone numbers to enhance business credibility.
  3. Configure security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Establish vulnerability disclosure and incident response policies with clear contact channels.
  5. Verify and update WHOIS registration data to ensure domain legitimacy and transparency.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
A WordPress-based website themed around 'Farktography', seemingly a community or forum related to photography or a parody thereof.
Key services
Online forums, Blog content, Community discussions
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
WordPress, PHP, jQuery, Bootstrap 4, Font Awesome
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a WordPress-based community forum themed around 'Farktography'.
  2. WHOIS data is unavailable or domain is unregistered according to raw WHOIS output.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the site.
  4. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses found.
  5. Site uses HTTPS with valid SSL.
  6. No security headers detected in the HTML content.
  7. No analytics or tracking scripts detected.
  8. Site content is safe and suitable for general audiences.
  9. Site uses common web technologies including WordPress, Bootstrap, jQuery.
  10. Navigation and structure are clear but content quality is basic.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses WordPress CMS with Bootstrap 4 for responsive design, jQuery for scripting, and Font Awesome for icons. The site loads scripts and stylesheets from its own domain and trusted external sources. Performance is moderate with no evident optimization issues. Mobile optimization is good due to Bootstrap usage. Accessibility features are basic, with some screen-reader text present. SEO optimization is minimal with basic meta tags but no Open Graph or JSON-LD structured data detected. The site lacks advanced analytics or marketing tools, indicating low technical complexity but also limited digital maturity.
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 farktography.net. 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 farktography.net.

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.