The website 'ANTI-META FEDI PACT' is a community-driven platform aimed at Fediverse instance administrators and moderators who pledge to block Meta-owned instances, specifically targeting a threat named 'project92'. It serves as a coordination and advocacy hub rather than a commercial business. The site provides a large list of participating admins/mods and links to an external form for signing the pact. The technical infrastructure is simple, relying on static HTML, CSS, and JavaScript with no detected CMS or advanced frameworks. Hosting appears to be via Namecheap with privacy-protected WHOIS registration. Security posture is minimal with no security headers or policies present, and no analytics or tracking scripts detected, indicating a privacy-conscious but basic setup. Overall, the site is functional and relevant to its niche audience but lacks formal privacy, cookie, and security policies, which limits its compliance and trustworthiness for broader audiences.
a(a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
b(b) Incident handling: One indicator
c(c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
d(d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
e(e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
f(f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
g(g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
h(h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
i(i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
j(j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside
Partly checked
One indicator
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.
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 X-Frame-Options header
Prevents clickjacking attacks
What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"
This scan found 21 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.
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
40
Email security
70
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
71
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 fedipact.online, from OffSeq Breach.
No leaked records found
Breach holds no records for fedipact.online right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.
Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.
Business context
Business profile
This initiative occupies a niche position within the Fediverse community, focusing on moderation and anti-Meta advocacy. It operates on a community pledge model without evident revenue streams or commercial services. The target audience is instance admins/mods concerned about Meta's influence. The business model is grassroots and voluntary, relying on manual vetting and community trust. The site references testimonials and provides contact for corrections, indicating some level of community engagement and transparency. There are no partnerships or subsidiaries indicated. Growth indicators are limited to community participation. The lack of formal business registration or certifications aligns with its grassroots nature.
Security posture
The website's security posture is basic and minimal. It uses HTTPS (implied by URL), but no DNSSEC is enabled, and no security headers are detected. There is no evidence of incident response or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms. No forms are hosted on the site itself, reducing attack surface, but also limiting user interaction security. The use of privacy-protected WHOIS is justified given the community focus and potential sensitivity. The absence of cookie or privacy policies is a compliance gap. Overall, the site is low risk but would benefit from improved security headers, DNSSEC, and formal policies to enhance trust and compliance.
Recommendations
Enable DNSSEC to improve domain security and prevent DNS spoofing.
Implement standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
Add comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve GDPR compliance and user trust.
Establish an incident response and vulnerability disclosure page or contact channel.
Consider adding HTTPS enforcement and monitoring to ensure secure connections.
Site observations
Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.
Business
Description
A website hosting a pact for Fediverse instance admins/mods to block Meta-owned instances, specifically targeting 'project92' as a threat to the Fediverse community.
Key services
Hosting a pledge form, Listing participating instance admins/mods, Providing information about the pact
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate
Technology
Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic
Security
Observed score
30/100
Analytics and tracking
Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor
Advertising
Transparency
poor
Site quality
Design
basic
User experience
basic
Content relevance
good
Navigation
basic
Professionalism
basic
Trustworthiness
moderate
Key observations
Website is a niche community advocacy platform focused on Fediverse instance moderation.
No formal privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
Contact is provided only via email and Fediverse handle.
No commercial or business registration information present.
No security headers or advanced security features detected.
No analytics or tracking scripts detected.
Design is simple with custom CSS and JavaScript for theme toggling and animations.
Large list of instance admins/mods who signed the pact is prominently displayed.
No forms on the site except an external link to a CryptPad form for signing the pact.
Technical notes
Notes
The website is built with static HTML, CSS, and JavaScript without any detected CMS or third-party frameworks. It uses custom CSS animations and theme toggling scripts. The site is hosted with DNS servers from Namecheap, with WHOIS privacy protection enabled. Performance is moderate with no heavy scripts or external dependencies. Mobile optimization is basic but present via viewport meta tag. Accessibility features are minimal but include some ARIA attributes. SEO is basic with Open Graph metadata but no structured JSON-LD data. There is no evidence of analytics or tracking technologies, aligning with privacy focus. Technical risks include lack of DNSSEC and security headers, which could be improved.
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.
Reviews of this site
Share your experience with fedipact.online. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.
Community rating
No published reviews yet. Be the first to review fedipact.online.