Skip to main content

Security report for heehee.community

Technology · N/a

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

Security score

65/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website www.heehee.community represents a community-driven cryptocurrency project built on the Solana blockchain. It emphasizes a fair launch with no presales, locked liquidity, and a doxxed developer, aiming to build a strong community and token utility through marketing, influencer partnerships, and premium services for token holders. The site presents a clear roadmap and team information, targeting crypto investors and enthusiasts interested in Solana tokens. Technically, the site is built using modern web technologies including React and Next.js, offering good mobile optimization and a visually consistent design. However, the site lacks critical compliance documents such as privacy and cookie policies, and no contact information is provided, which impacts trust and regulatory compliance. Security posture is moderate with no visible vulnerabilities but missing security headers and SSL configuration details. WHOIS data is unavailable due to query failure or privacy protection, limiting domain legitimacy verification. Overall, the site is functional and informative but requires improvements in compliance, security, and transparency to enhance trustworthiness and user confidence.

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 heehee.community

This scan found 25 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
72
Security headers
30
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
65

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 positions itself as an emerging player in the Solana-based cryptocurrency market, leveraging community engagement and influencer marketing to grow its user base. Its business model revolves around token sales, community-driven growth, and premium services for token holders. The roadmap indicates a phased approach to marketing, team expansion, and utility development, including giveaways and collaborations. The presence of a doxxed developer and locked liquidity pool are positive trust signals. The project targets crypto investors and community members seeking fair and transparent token launches. Partnerships with influencers and social media activity suggest active marketing efforts. However, the lack of formal business registration details and WHOIS transparency may raise concerns for institutional investors. The project appears to be in early growth stages with a small team and limited formal business infrastructure.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic security posture with HTTPS presumed but not explicitly confirmed in the data. No security headers were detected in the provided content, and no forms or user input fields are present, reducing attack surface. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates compliance gaps, particularly with GDPR and other data protection regulations. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is available, limiting preparedness for security events. The use of modern frameworks like Next.js is positive but requires proper configuration to ensure security best practices. The lack of WHOIS transparency and domain registration details reduces trust and may indicate privacy protection common in crypto projects. Recommendations include implementing security headers, publishing compliance documents, and establishing incident response contacts to improve security maturity.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and verify HTTPS with strong SSL/TLS configuration and regularly monitor certificate validity.
  2. Add comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and other data protection laws.
  3. Publish clear contact information including support and incident response channels to enhance trust and compliance.
  4. Configure security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection to mitigate common web attacks.
  5. Conduct regular security audits and vulnerability assessments to identify and remediate potential risks.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Community-based cryptocurrency on Solana blockchain with a focus on fair launch, community engagement, and token utility development.
Key services
Cryptocurrency token launch and trading, Community engagement and social media presence, Premium service for token holders, Marketing and influencer collaborations
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
React, Next.js, JavaScript, CSS, HTML5
Frameworks
Next.js
Platforms
Solana blockchain
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
50/100
Good practices seen
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No forms detected to collect user data

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 fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenge
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly provided
  4. Social media links are present and active
  5. No forms or data collection mechanisms detected
  6. WHOIS data is unavailable, indicating privacy protection or query failure
  7. Website uses modern React/Next.js framework with good design and mobile optimization
  8. Security headers and SSL configuration details are not provided in the data
  9. Content is focused on cryptocurrency token community and roadmap
  10. No adult or explicit content detected
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern React and Next.js stack, leveraging server-side rendering and static export features for performance. The design is visually appealing with consistent branding and good mobile responsiveness. However, SEO optimization is basic with minimal meta tags and no structured data like JSON-LD or Open Graph tags detected. No analytics or tracking scripts were found, indicating minimal user tracking. The site lacks forms or interactive elements, reducing complexity but also limiting user engagement features. Hosting provider and CDN details are not evident from the content. Performance appears moderate with preloaded fonts and CSS, but no explicit performance metrics are available. Opportunities exist to enhance SEO, accessibility, and add analytics for better user insights and marketing effectiveness.
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 heehee.community. 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 heehee.community.

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.