Skip to main content

Security report for hackaday.com

Hackaday · Technology · N/a

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

Security score

70/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Hackaday is a well-established technology media website founded in 2004, focusing on hardware hacks, DIY projects, and engineering news. It serves a niche audience of technology enthusiasts, makers, and hackers by providing daily fresh content, community project showcases, and contests. The site operates under the parent company Supplyframe and leverages affiliate marketing and advertising as key revenue streams. Technically, the website is built on WordPress VIP with modern web technologies including Jetpack, Google Analytics, and Facebook Pixel, ensuring a robust and scalable infrastructure. The site demonstrates good mobile optimization, accessibility, and SEO practices, contributing to an excellent user experience. Security-wise, the site enforces HTTPS, uses domain locking status flags, and employs reputable third-party services for ads and analytics. However, it lacks DNSSEC and a dedicated security policy or vulnerability disclosure page, which are recommended for further strengthening its security posture. Overall, Hackaday presents a professional, trustworthy, and content-rich platform with a strong market position in the technology media sector.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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 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
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-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

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

Keep watching hackaday.com

This scan found 22 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
42
Security headers
30
Email security
95
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
70

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

Hackaday holds a strong position in the technology and maker media niche, leveraging a content publishing business model supplemented by advertising and affiliate partnerships, notably with Tindie and Hackaday.io. Its target audience includes engineers, hobbyists, and DIY enthusiasts worldwide. The company benefits from a long domain history and consistent branding, enhancing its credibility. The partnership ecosystem includes its parent company Supplyframe and related platforms for community projects and e-commerce. Growth indicators include active content updates, community engagement, and diversified revenue streams. Strategic observations suggest opportunities in expanding security transparency and enhancing direct business contact information to further solidify trust.

Security posture

The website exhibits a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, domain status protections, and use of trusted third-party ad and analytics providers. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The absence of DNSSEC and a formal security policy or incident response page indicates room for improvement in security governance and transparency. The site uses standard security best practices but could benefit from enhanced HTTP security headers and a published vulnerability disclosure mechanism. Overall, the security maturity is good, supporting the site's operational integrity and user trust.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response page to enhance transparency.
  3. Implement a security.txt file to facilitate responsible vulnerability disclosure.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and plugins to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Content-Type-Options for improved protection.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Hackaday
Description
Hackaday is a technology media website focused on hardware hacks, DIY projects, and engineering news. It provides daily fresh content including blog posts, featured and trending projects, and community engagement.
Key services
Daily technology and hardware hack news, Community project hosting and showcasing, Advertising and affiliate product promotion, Contests and events
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.8.2, Jetpack plugin, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Supplyframe Ads, Typekit Fonts, Slick Carousel
Frameworks
WordPress, Jetpack
Platforms
WordPress VIP hosting
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Domain locked with multiple EPP status flags
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of reputable ad and analytics providers

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Jetpack Stats
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Supplyframe Ads
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, Jetpack Stats, StackAdapt
Marketing tools
Typekit Fonts
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a well-established technology media site with active content and community.
  2. Uses WordPress VIP hosting and modern web technologies.
  3. Includes comprehensive privacy and terms policies hosted on parent company domain.
  4. Advertising and tracking are present but transparent and standard for media sites.
  5. No security or content blocking detected.
  6. No explicit or adult content present.
  7. WHOIS data supports legitimacy and long-term operation.
Technical notes

Notes

Hackaday's technical infrastructure is based on WordPress VIP hosting, leveraging WordPress 6.8.2 with Jetpack and modern JavaScript libraries like Slick Carousel. The site integrates multiple third-party services for analytics (Google Analytics, Jetpack Stats), advertising (Supplyframe Ads), and marketing (Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel). Performance is moderate with good mobile responsiveness and accessibility features. The use of Typekit fonts and structured CSS contributes to a polished design. Technical risks are minimal but include reliance on multiple external scripts which require ongoing security monitoring. Opportunities exist to optimize performance further and enhance security headers to reduce attack surface.
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 hackaday.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 hackaday.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.