Skip to main content

Security report for fedipact.online

Technology · Iceland

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

71/100

Risk levelMedium

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

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.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of fedipact.online. View the latest report

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

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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

  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

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

Keep watching fedipact.online

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.

Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. See sample alerts.

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
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.

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

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

  1. Enable DNSSEC to improve domain security and prevent DNS spoofing.
  2. Implement standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Add comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve GDPR compliance and user trust.
  4. Establish an incident response and vulnerability disclosure page or contact channel.
  5. 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

  1. Website is a niche community advocacy platform focused on Fediverse instance moderation.
  2. No formal privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. Contact is provided only via email and Fediverse handle.
  4. No commercial or business registration information present.
  5. No security headers or advanced security features detected.
  6. No analytics or tracking scripts detected.
  7. Design is simple with custom CSS and JavaScript for theme toggling and animations.
  8. Large list of instance admins/mods who signed the pact is prominently displayed.
  9. 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.

Retrieved 2026-10-25

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 71/100Medium29 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with fedipact.online. 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 fedipact.online.

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.