Skip to main content

Security report for gtfcharge.com

GTFLIX TV, s.r.o. · Technology · Czech Republic

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

72/100

Risk levelMedium

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

GTFCharge is a payment processing and billing service specializing in secure, fraud-resistant transactions for digital content providers. The company, operated by GTFLIX TV, s.r.o., has been established since 2012 and positions itself as a leader in fraud prevention and chargeback avoidance. Their services include real-time fraud detection, competitive transaction pricing, and an integrated affiliate marketing system to enhance brand recognition and revenue. The website is professionally designed with clear navigation and mobile optimization, supporting a positive user experience for their target audience of businesses requiring secure payment solutions. Technically, the website employs a modern technology stack including Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Google reCAPTCHA v3, jQuery, and Bootstrap. Hosting and DNS services are managed via Cloudflare, providing performance and security benefits. The site uses HTTPS with a good SSL configuration but lacks DNSSEC and security headers, which are recommended for enhanced security. The website's performance is moderate, with basic SEO and accessibility features implemented. From a security perspective, the site demonstrates good practices such as HTTPS enforcement and use of reCAPTCHA to protect forms. However, the absence of DNSSEC, security headers, and a published security policy or incident response contact reduces the overall security posture. Privacy compliance is partial; while privacy and terms policies exist, there is no cookie consent mechanism despite the use of tracking technologies, which may pose compliance risks under GDPR. Contact information is limited to a support form without direct emails or phone numbers, which may affect user trust. Overall, GTFCharge presents a credible and professional payment processing service with a solid technical foundation and moderate security posture. Strategic improvements in privacy compliance, security headers, and transparency in incident response would enhance trust and regulatory adherence. The domain registration data supports the legitimacy and consistency of the business claims, reinforcing confidence in the service's authenticity.

Scanned

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 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

  3. 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

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

Keep watching gtfcharge.com

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. 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
72
Security headers
45
Email security
80
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
72

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 gtfcharge.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
166
Employees
0
Customers
166
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
69%

1 subdomain 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 gtfcharge.com.

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

GTFCharge operates in the technology sector, focusing on payment processing and fraud prevention for digital content providers. The company leverages a business model centered on transaction volume pricing and offers value-added services such as affiliate marketing to increase client revenue. Market positioning emphasizes security leadership and customization capabilities. The company targets merchants and businesses needing secure billing solutions, with growth potential indicated by long domain tenure and integration of modern marketing tools. The partnership ecosystem appears limited to internal affiliate systems and standard third-party analytics providers. Revenue streams likely derive from transaction fees and affiliate program commissions. Strategic observations suggest opportunities to expand transparency and compliance to strengthen market trust and competitive advantage.

Security posture

The security maturity of GTFCharge is moderate. The website enforces HTTPS and uses Google reCAPTCHA v3 to mitigate automated abuse on forms. The domain is protected with clientTransferProhibited status, reducing risk of unauthorized transfers. However, the lack of DNSSEC and absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options represent gaps that could be exploited. No published security policy or incident response contacts were found, limiting transparency and readiness for security events. Privacy compliance is partial, with no cookie consent mechanism despite tracking scripts, posing regulatory risks. No direct contact emails or phone numbers for security or abuse reporting were identified. Overall, the security posture is adequate for business operations but would benefit from enhancements in DNS security, header implementation, and compliance documentation.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS integrity and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement essential security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to mitigate common web vulnerabilities.
  3. Publish a formal security policy and provide clear incident response contact channels such as security@ or abuse@ email addresses.
  4. Add a cookie consent mechanism to comply with GDPR and other privacy regulations given the use of tracking technologies.
  5. Enhance transparency by providing direct contact information such as company emails and phone numbers to improve user trust and support.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
GTFLIX TV, s.r.o.
Description
GTFCharge provides a payment processing and billing solution focused on secure, fraud-resistant transactions for digital content access. It offers real-time fraud prevention, competitive transaction rates, and affiliate marketing tools.
Key services
Payment processing, Fraud prevention, Chargeback avoidance, Affiliate marketing system, Recurring payment management
Content quality
good
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Google reCAPTCHA v3, jQuery 3.4.1, Bootstrap, Modernizr
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA v3 on forms
  • ClientTransferProhibited domain status

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website provides a payment processing service focused on fraud prevention and billing for digital content.
  2. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found; contact is via support form only.
  3. No explicit cookie consent mechanism found despite use of tracking and analytics.
  4. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure policy found.
  5. Use of modern JavaScript libraries and Google services for analytics and security.
  6. No DNSSEC enabled which is a minor security gap.
  7. No visible security headers in provided data which could improve security posture.
  8. Website content is professional and well structured with clear navigation.
  9. No social media links or phone numbers explicitly provided.
  10. WHOIS data supports legitimacy and consistency of the business.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a custom CMS or framework using modern JavaScript libraries including jQuery 3.4.1 and Bootstrap for responsive design. Google Analytics and Tag Manager are integrated for analytics and marketing purposes, alongside Google reCAPTCHA v3 for bot mitigation. Hosting and DNS are managed via Cloudflare, providing CDN and security benefits. The site loads with moderate performance and is mobile optimized with basic accessibility features. SEO implementation is basic with standard meta tags but lacks advanced structured data or Open Graph tags. No CMS-specific footprints were detected, indicating a custom or proprietary platform. Technical risks include missing DNSSEC and security headers, which could be addressed to reduce attack surface and improve compliance.
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 gtfcharge.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 gtfcharge.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.