Skip to main content

Security report for front-end.social

front-end.social · Technology · Iceland

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

front-end.social is a small, community-driven Mastodon instance focused on front-end web developers and enthusiasts who value human-centered, accessible, and diverse web development. The platform operates as a decentralized social media server, emphasizing a safe and inclusive environment with a clear code of conduct and active moderation. The community is intentionally kept small to maintain quality interactions and sustainable growth. Technically, the site runs Mastodon version 4.4.1 with a React-based frontend, delivering a modern and accessible user experience optimized for mobile devices. Security practices include HTTPS enforcement and manual moderation, though some improvements such as enabling DNSSEC and adding security headers could enhance the security posture. Privacy compliance is basic with a privacy policy present but lacks cookie consent mechanisms and terms of service. Overall, the website demonstrates good business credibility and technical maturity for a niche community platform.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of front-end.social. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
58/ 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

5 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

  2. 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
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 384-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

  3. DNS health

    DNS sends visitors and email to the right servers. Misconfigured records can cause outages or let someone redirect your traffic.

    • High

      Weak SPF Policy

      SPF record has permissive policy allowing any server to send email

      What to do: Use -all or ~all qualifier for better email security

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

Keep watching front-end.social

This scan found 24 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
52
Security headers
75
Email security
65
DNS health
55
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
58
Average
68

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

The website targets front-end web developers and related communities, positioning itself as a niche Mastodon instance with a community-first approach. Its business model is non-commercial, focusing on providing a decentralized social media platform with moderated content and a welcoming culture. The organization is small, founded in 2022, and uses privacy protection for domain registration, which is justified given its community nature. The platform leverages open-source Mastodon software and maintains transparency about its moderation team. There are no indications of commercial partnerships or subsidiaries. Growth is deliberately controlled to ensure sustainability and quality of community engagement.

Security posture

The security posture is moderate with HTTPS enabled and domain status set to clientTransferProhibited, indicating domain transfer protection. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options represents areas for improvement. The moderation team manually reviews content violations, avoiding automated disciplinary actions, which supports a thoughtful security culture. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are publicly available, which could be a gap in readiness. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerabilities were detected in the content. Overall, the security maturity is appropriate for a small community server but could benefit from formalized policies and technical enhancements.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement standard security headers (CSP, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to enhance browser security.
  3. Publish explicit security and incident response policies to improve transparency and readiness.
  4. Add a cookie policy and consent mechanism to comply with privacy regulations and improve user trust.
  5. Consider creating a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
front-end.social
Description
Front-end web makers who value humans over technology & embrace diversity on an accessible web. We hope to stay small & grow slowly. Mascots by @stephaniewalter.
Key services
Hosting a Mastodon server instance, Providing a community platform for front-end web makers, Moderation and community management
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Mastodon 4.4.1, React, JavaScript ES Modules, CSS, HTML5
Frameworks
React
Platforms
Mastodon
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • ClientTransferProhibited domain status
  • Manual moderation of content and behavior
  • No automated disciplinary actions

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a Mastodon instance focused on front-end web developers
  2. Content is community-oriented with clear code of conduct
  3. No commercial advertising or tracking detected
  4. Registrations currently paused to maintain community size
  5. Moderation team is transparent and reachable
  6. No explicit security or incident response policies published
  7. No cookie consent mechanism detected
  8. Privacy policy is present but basic
  9. No terms of service found
  10. No phone numbers or physical addresses provided
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern tech stack centered on Mastodon 4.4.1 with a React frontend, delivering a responsive and accessible user experience. The site loads resources from a Mastodon CDN and GitHub for source code references. Performance is moderate, with no major issues detected but some potential for optimization. The site lacks a CMS and appears to be custom-built atop Mastodon's platform. SEO is basic but includes appropriate meta tags and Open Graph data. Accessibility is good with mobile optimization and ARIA labels. Technical risks include missing DNSSEC and security headers, which could be addressed to reduce attack surface and improve trust.
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. 68/100Medium31 findingsView report
  2. 68/100 −5Medium31 findingsView report
  3. 73/100Medium26 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with front-end.social. 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 front-end.social.

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.