Skip to main content

Security report for github.io

GitHub · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

GitHub Pages is a service provided by GitHub, Inc., a subsidiary of Microsoft, offering static website hosting directly integrated with GitHub repositories. It targets developers, organizations, and open source projects, enabling easy deployment of personal and project websites. The platform leverages Jekyll for site generation and supports custom domains, positioning itself as a leading solution in developer-centric web hosting. Technically, the website employs modern web standards including HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, and Jekyll framework. It is hosted on GitHub's infrastructure, ensuring fast performance and good mobile optimization. The site is well-structured with clear navigation and SEO-friendly metadata, reflecting a mature digital presence. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and avoids exposing sensitive data. However, explicit security headers are not visible in the HTML source, and no direct security or incident response policies are published on this page. Privacy compliance is strong with a comprehensive privacy policy linked, though no cookie consent mechanism is detected. Overall, the security posture is solid but could benefit from enhanced transparency and additional headers. The overall risk assessment is low given the site's association with a reputable enterprise and its professional presentation. Strategic recommendations include adding explicit security headers, implementing cookie consent, and publishing security policies to further enhance trust and compliance.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of github.io. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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. 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 Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1
    • 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 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 github.io

This scan found 19 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. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

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
100
Security headers
15
Email security
80
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
73

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 github.io, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
74,446
Employees
1
Customers
72,304
Third parties
2,141
Weak passwords
26%

Latest record dated 2026-10-06 · 10,468 subdomains affected

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 github.io.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • sa•••@sasismene.github.iosasismene.github.io2026-10-06

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

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)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

GitHub Pages operates within the technology sector as a platform service integrated into GitHub's ecosystem. Its competitive advantage lies in seamless integration with Git repositories and developer workflows. The business model is service-based, offering free and paid tiers through GitHub. Target customers include individual developers, open source communities, and organizations seeking simple static site hosting. Growth is supported by GitHub's large user base and Microsoft's backing. The ecosystem includes official documentation, training, and support channels, reinforcing a strong partnership and community network.

Security posture

The security maturity of GitHub Pages is high, leveraging enterprise-grade infrastructure and HTTPS enforcement. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analyzed content. Compliance with GDPR is indicated by a comprehensive privacy policy. However, the absence of visible security headers and incident response contacts on this page suggests room for improvement in transparency and defense-in-depth. The lack of cookie consent mechanisms may pose compliance risks in some jurisdictions. Overall, the security culture appears mature but could be enhanced with published policies and explicit headers.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish explicit HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options.
  2. Add a cookie consent mechanism to comply with privacy regulations and enhance user trust.
  3. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and dependencies to prevent vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance transparency by linking to certifications or compliance attestations where applicable.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
GitHub
Description
Websites for you and your projects, hosted directly from your GitHub repository. Just edit, push, and your changes are live.
Key services
Static website hosting, Git repository hosting, Site generation with Jekyll, Custom domain support
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Jekyll, GitHub Pages, HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, jQuery
Frameworks
Jekyll
Platforms
GitHub
Performance
fast
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No visible vulnerable libraries

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is comprehensive, well-structured, and professionally presented.
  3. No forms collecting personal data directly on the page.
  4. No explicit contact emails or phone numbers found on this page; contact is via support.github.com.
  5. No cookie consent mechanism detected despite privacy policy presence.
  6. Strong branding and trust signals consistent with GitHub and Microsoft.
  7. No advertising or tracking scripts detected in the provided HTML.
  8. Security headers not visible in HTML source; likely handled at server level.
  9. WHOIS data for subdomain not available, which is expected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern tech stack centered around Jekyll for static site generation, hosted on GitHub's platform. The HTML is valid and well-structured with appropriate meta tags for SEO and social sharing. Performance is optimized with minimal external dependencies and fast loading images. Mobile optimization is good with responsive design elements. No CMS is detected as the site is static. Hosting is managed by GitHub, ensuring reliability and scalability. Technical risks are minimal, though adding security headers and cookie consent would improve compliance and security posture.
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. 93/100Low9 findingsView report
  2. 84/100Low22 findingsView report
  3. 84/100 +11Low22 findingsView report
  4. 73/100Medium28 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with github.io. 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 github.io.

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.