Skip to main content

Security report for ghbtns.com

Mark Otto · Technology · N/a

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

Security score

69/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website ghbtns.com is an open source project created and maintained by Mark Otto, offering a set of static GitHub buttons that dynamically display watch, fork, sponsor, and follow counts for GitHub repositories. It targets developers and GitHub users who want to showcase repository metrics on their sites. The project is licensed under Apache 2 and hosted on GitHub Pages with Cloudflare Universal SSL, ensuring secure HTTPS access. The site is technically well-implemented using Jekyll, with good mobile optimization and SEO practices, though accessibility features are basic. Security posture is moderate, with HTTPS enforced but lacking security headers and DNSSEC. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies are present, and no contact information is provided, which limits compliance and trust aspects. WHOIS data shows a consistent and well-aged domain registered via GoDaddy with protective domain status flags, supporting legitimacy. Overall, the site is a niche utility with good technical quality but could improve in privacy and security best practices.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of ghbtns.com. View the latest report

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"

    • 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 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 ghbtns.com

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
75
Security headers
40
Email security
80
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
69

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 project operates in the technology sector as a small-scale open source utility tool. Its business model revolves around providing free embeddable GitHub buttons to developers, enhancing repository visibility and engagement. The market position is niche, serving a specific developer audience. Key services include dynamic GitHub buttons for stars, forks, sponsors, and follows. The project is authored by Mark Otto, a recognized figure in the developer community, which adds credibility. The open source nature and Apache 2 license encourage community contributions and transparency. The lack of formal business contact details and policies suggests it is more a personal or community-driven project than a commercial enterprise. External links to GitHub and Twitter reinforce the community and social engagement focus.

Security posture

Security maturity is moderate. The site enforces HTTPS via Cloudflare Universal SSL, which is a strong baseline. Domain registration includes EPP status flags that prevent unauthorized domain changes, enhancing domain security. However, the absence of DNSSEC is a minor gap. No security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options are detected, which could expose the site to certain web-based attacks. There are no forms or user inputs, reducing attack surface. No privacy or cookie policies are present, indicating compliance gaps with GDPR and related regulations. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, limiting transparency in security management. Overall, the site is low risk but could improve security posture by implementing headers, policies, and disclosure mechanisms.

Recommendations

  1. Implement standard security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Add privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance with GDPR and build user trust.
  3. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to strengthen DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  4. Provide a vulnerability disclosure or security contact page to facilitate responsible reporting and incident response.
  5. Consider adding basic contact information or a dedicated business page to improve credibility and user support.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Mark Otto
Description
A set of static buttons with dynamic watch and fork counts for any repo hosted on GitHub.
Key services
Static GitHub buttons with dynamic watch, fork, sponsor, and follow counts
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, Jekyll, Cloudflare Universal SSL
Frameworks
Jekyll
Platforms
GitHub Pages, Cloudflare
Performance
fast
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced via Cloudflare Universal SSL
  • Domain status includes clientDeleteProhibited and other EPP protections

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a niche open source project providing GitHub buttons.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. No contact information or forms present on the site.
  4. Site uses HTTPS with Cloudflare Universal SSL.
  5. No security headers detected in HTML content.
  6. No analytics or tracking scripts detected beyond Twitter widgets.
  7. Content is technical, safe, and targeted at developers.
  8. WHOIS data is consistent and domain is well aged.
  9. No signs of suspicious or malicious activity.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using Jekyll, a static site generator, and hosted on GitHub Pages with Cloudflare providing Universal SSL. The tech stack includes HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript for Twitter widgets. The site loads quickly and is mobile optimized with a clean, consistent design. SEO is well addressed with proper meta tags, Open Graph, and JSON-LD structured data. There are no complex backend systems or forms, reducing technical complexity and attack surface. The site does not use analytics or tracking scripts beyond Twitter widgets, minimizing privacy concerns. Technical debt is low due to the static nature, but opportunities exist to enhance security headers and compliance documentation. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern, efficient, and suitable for the site's purpose.
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. 69/100Medium30 findingsView report
  2. 69/100Medium30 findingsView report
  3. 69/100Medium30 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with ghbtns.com. 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 ghbtns.com.

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.