Skip to main content

Security report for hackerarchitects.com

Hacker Architects & Interior Design · Real Estate · United States

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

Security score

66/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Hacker Architects & Interior Design is a professional architecture studio based in Portland, Oregon, specializing in creating meaningful and sustainable spaces that connect people with their environment. The website serves as a portfolio and blog showcasing diverse projects across sectors such as education, cultural, residential, hospitality, and office design. The firm positions itself as a medium-sized regional player with a focus on clarity, meaning, and environmental integration in design. Technically, the website is built on the Squarespace platform, leveraging modern web technologies including jQuery, Typekit fonts, and ElfSight widgets. The site is mobile-optimized and provides a good user experience with clear navigation and professional content presentation. Security posture is solid with HTTPS enforced and no visible vulnerabilities, though it lacks advanced security headers and formal privacy or cookie policies, which are compliance gaps. The absence of WHOIS data for the domain raises questions about domain registration legitimacy, but the professional nature of the site and contact information support its credibility. Overall, the site is well-constructed but would benefit from enhanced privacy compliance and security best practices.

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"

    • 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 hackerarchitects.com

This scan found 24 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
62
Security headers
35
Email security
85
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
66

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 company operates in the Real Estate industry, specifically architecture and interior design services. Its business model revolves around project-based client engagements, showcasing completed and in-progress works to attract new clients and collaborators. The target audience includes commercial, educational, cultural institutions, and residential clients seeking high-quality architectural design. The firm demonstrates a strong portfolio with sustainable and strategic design elements, indicating competitive advantages in environmental and daylight-focused architecture. The website's content and structure suggest a medium-sized firm with a regional focus. There is no indication of parent companies or subsidiaries. The firm uses third-party platforms for web hosting and content management, reflecting a modern digital approach. The lack of privacy and cookie policies may expose the firm to regulatory risks, especially in jurisdictions with strict data protection laws.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS, ensuring encrypted communications. However, it lacks several important security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options, which could mitigate risks like clickjacking and MIME sniffing. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. Forms present are minimal and do not appear to collect sensitive personal data beyond standard contact information. The absence of a formal security policy or incident response information indicates limited transparency in security governance. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files were found. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a portfolio site but could be improved to meet higher standards and compliance requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear consent mechanisms to ensure GDPR and other data protection compliance.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Publish a security policy and incident response plan on the website to improve transparency and preparedness.
  4. Consider adding a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  5. Verify and update domain registration information to ensure WHOIS data is complete and accurate, enhancing trustworthiness.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Hacker Architects & Interior Design
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Hacker Architects & Interior Design
Description
Hacker is an architecture studio based in Portland, Oregon united by a desire to create spaces that enrich the world—spaces that make us feel more connected to the landscape, each other and ourselves. We seek clarity and meaning in every aspect of the work.
Key services
Architecture design, Interior design, Project collaboration, Sustainable and strategic daylight design
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Squarespace CMS, jQuery, Typekit Fonts, Google Fonts, ElfSight Widgets
Platforms
Squarespace
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
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

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Marketing tools
ElfSight
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professional architecture firm portfolio and blog.
  2. Content is rich with project descriptions and images.
  3. No privacy or cookie policies found, which is a compliance gap.
  4. No terms of service or security policies present.
  5. Contact information is clearly provided with physical address, phone, and email.
  6. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
  7. WHOIS data is missing, indicating possible domain registration issues or privacy protection.
  8. Website uses Squarespace CMS and related technologies.
  9. No WAF or blocking detected; site fully accessible.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the Squarespace platform, utilizing modern web technologies including jQuery and Typekit fonts for typography. It integrates third-party widgets from ElfSight for enhanced functionality. The site demonstrates good mobile optimization and responsive design. Performance is moderate, typical for CMS-based sites with rich media content. SEO is supported by proper meta tags, Open Graph data, and structured JSON-LD schema for organization and local business. Accessibility features are basic and could be improved. The site does not expose sensitive data and uses HTTPS exclusively. However, the lack of advanced security headers and privacy compliance features indicates areas for technical improvement. The domain's WHOIS data is missing, suggesting potential registration or privacy issues that should be addressed to avoid trust concerns.
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 hackerarchitects.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 hackerarchitects.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.