Skip to main content

Security report for futacockinside.me

Other · Germany

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

65/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website futacockinside.me operates as a personal game archive titled "Lea's Game Archive". It hosts various directories of game files across multiple platforms, accessible only after password authentication. The site is clearly intended for personal use rather than commercial purposes, with no evident business or contact information provided. The domain is relatively new, registered in 2022, and the hosting setup includes suspicious nameservers that may pose security concerns. The site uses a custom analytics script but lacks standard privacy and cookie policies, which impacts its compliance posture. Technically, the site is built with basic HTML, CSS, and JavaScript, including Google Fonts for styling. It is moderately optimized for mobile devices but lacks advanced SEO and accessibility features. No CMS or major frameworks are detected. The hosting provider is not clearly identified beyond the registrar and suspicious DNS configuration. Performance appears moderate with no major errors or broken elements. From a security perspective, the site lacks DNSSEC, security headers, and visible HTTPS enforcement details, which lowers its security posture. The use of suspicious nameservers and absence of privacy or security policies further reduce trustworthiness. However, no WAF or blocking mechanisms are detected, and the content is safe with no adult or explicit material. Overall, the site is functional but has significant gaps in security and compliance best practices. The overall risk assessment suggests caution due to DNS and security configuration concerns. Strategic recommendations include improving DNS security, implementing HTTPS and security headers, adding privacy and cookie policies, and providing clear contact information to enhance trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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

7 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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google APIs

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

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

Keep watching futacockinside.me

This scan found 23 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
45
Email security
70
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
65

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 futacockinside.me, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
7
Employees
0
Customers
0
Third parties
7
Weak passwords
0%

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for futacockinside.me.

Select it in the checkout above.

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

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 serves a niche personal use case as a game archive, targeting individual users interested in accessing game files across various platforms. It does not operate as a commercial business and lacks revenue streams, partnerships, or formal market positioning. The business model is a private archive with password-protected downloads, indicating limited growth or commercial intent. The absence of contact or company information suggests a sole operator or hobbyist. The suspicious DNS setup may indicate a lack of professional hosting arrangements. There are no indicators of partnerships or subsidiaries. Overall, the site operates outside typical business ecosystems and serves a specialized personal audience.

Security posture

Security maturity is low due to missing DNSSEC, lack of security headers, and suspicious DNS nameservers. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates non-compliance with GDPR and related regulations. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided. The site does not expose sensitive data visibly but lacks best practices such as HTTPS enforcement and secure cookie handling. The custom analytics script may collect user data without clear consent mechanisms. Incident response readiness and security culture indicators are absent. The site would benefit from implementing standard security controls and compliance documentation to reduce risk.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC and switch to reputable nameservers to improve domain security and trust.
  2. Implement HTTPS with strong TLS configuration and enforce it site-wide.
  3. Add security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  4. Publish clear privacy and cookie policies with GDPR compliance considerations.
  5. Provide contact information and consider adding a vulnerability disclosure policy to improve transparency and trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
A personal archive website hosting various game files and directories for personal use only, requiring a password to enable downloads.
Key services
Game file hosting, Password-protected downloads
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, Google Fonts (Fira Mono)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
40/100
Good practices seen
  • Domain status includes clientDeleteProhibited and clientTransferProhibited

Analytics and tracking

Services
Custom analytics via https://stats.lea.pet
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a personal game archive with password-protected downloads.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. No contact information or business details provided.
  4. Site uses custom analytics script from a third-party domain.
  5. Nameservers are suspicious and may indicate risk.
  6. No security headers or HTTPS enforcement visible in provided data.
  7. Content is safe and non-adult.
  8. No WAF or blocking detected; site is accessible.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a simple tech stack with HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, and Google Fonts. It includes a custom analytics script from an external domain. The site is moderately mobile optimized but lacks advanced SEO and accessibility features. Hosting details are unclear, with suspicious DNS nameservers that may pose risks. No CMS or frameworks are detected, indicating a static or lightly dynamic site. Performance is moderate with no visible errors. Technical debt appears low but modernization opportunities include improving security configurations and adding compliance features.
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 futacockinside.me. 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 futacockinside.me.

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.