Skip to main content

Security report for fatso.ma

Fatsoma · Media · N/a

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

81/100

Risk levelLow

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

Fatsoma operates as an event discovery and ticketing platform, providing services to event organizers, venues, and consumers. The company offers a comprehensive ticketing and event marketing system trusted by over 40,000 organizers, alongside business and rep dashboards to facilitate event management. The website is built on modern web technologies including Ember.js and integrates multiple analytics and marketing tools such as Google Analytics, RudderStack, and Hotjar. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforced and use of Cloudflare Turnstile captcha, though explicit security headers are not detected in the provided data. Privacy compliance is well addressed with clear privacy and cookie policies and consent mechanisms. However, the absence of WHOIS data for the domain introduces some uncertainty regarding domain registration legitimacy. Overall, the website is professional, secure, and user-friendly, targeting a broad audience interested in events and ticketing.

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

3 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

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

Keep watching fatso.ma

This scan found 14 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
95
Security headers
55
Email security
90
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
81

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

Fatsoma holds a solid market position within the event ticketing and marketing sector, leveraging a SaaS business model focused on online ticket sales and event promotion. Its target customers include event organizers, venues, and attendees, supported by a partner ecosystem including ticketing and business dashboard services. The company demonstrates growth potential through its extensive user base and integration of marketing tools. The presence of partner domains such as madebysoma.co indicates strategic collaborations to enhance service offerings. The business model is primarily digital, relying on platform usage and service subscriptions. While domain registration details are unclear, the operational footprint and service portfolio suggest a medium-sized enterprise with a focus on media and entertainment sectors.

Security posture

The website exhibits a mature security posture with mandatory HTTPS, cookie consent, and use of CAPTCHA to mitigate automated abuse. The integration of multiple analytics and marketing scripts necessitates ongoing vigilance to prevent vulnerabilities. The lack of visible security headers such as Content Security Policy or HSTS is a gap that should be addressed to enhance protection against common web attacks. No direct contact information for security incidents or a published security policy was found, which could impact incident response readiness. Overall, the security measures are adequate for the business type but could be improved with additional headers and explicit security documentation.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to strengthen web security.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response plan accessible to users and partners.
  3. Provide clear contact channels for security incidents such as abuse@ or security@ email addresses.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and dependencies to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance WHOIS transparency or provide domain registration details to improve trust and legitimacy perception.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Fatsoma
Description
Fatsoma is an event discovery and ticketing platform offering event listings, ticketing, and marketing services targeting event organizers, venues, and consumers.
Key services
Event discovery, Ticketing and event marketing system, Business dashboard for event organizers, Rep dashboard
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Ember.js, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, RudderStack, Hotjar, Stripe, Klarna, Cloudflare Turnstile, Imgix
Frameworks
Ember.js
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent banner
  • Use of Cloudflare Turnstile captcha

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, RudderStack, Hotjar
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Hotjar, RudderStack
Marketing tools
RudderStack, Hotjar
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a 404 error page but contains full navigation and footer content.
  2. No WAF or security challenge detected.
  3. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on the error page.
  4. Privacy and cookie policies are present and linked.
  5. Use of modern JavaScript frameworks and analytics tools.
  6. No visible security headers detected in provided data.
  7. No WHOIS data available for domain, indicating possible privacy protection or domain registration anomaly.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using Ember.js, a modern JavaScript framework, and integrates multiple third-party services for analytics (Google Analytics, RudderStack, Hotjar), marketing (Google Tag Manager), payment processing (Stripe, Klarna), and security (Cloudflare Turnstile). The site uses CDN-hosted assets for fonts and scripts, indicating a distributed hosting approach likely optimized for performance. Preconnect and DNS-prefetch hints are used to improve loading times. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design elements. However, no CMS is detected, suggesting a custom or framework-based build. Performance is moderate with asynchronous script loading. Accessibility is basic but could be improved with more explicit ARIA roles and semantic markup. SEO is supported by meta tags and Open Graph data but lacks JSON-LD structured data. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern and well-implemented with room for enhancements in accessibility and security headers.
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 fatso.ma. 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 fatso.ma.

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.