Skip to main content

Security report for hs.coop

Hostsharing eG · Technology · Germany

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Email security and 3 other checks.

Security score

59/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Hostsharing eG operates hostsharing.coop, a Mastodon instance dedicated to members of their cooperative hosting community. The website serves as a social networking platform within the Fediverse, enabling decentralized communication. The business is positioned as a niche cooperative provider in the technology sector, focusing on privacy-respecting social media hosting since 2018. The site content is primarily in German, targeting cooperative members and Fediverse users. Technically, the platform uses Mastodon version 4.4.8 with modern web technologies including React and ES modules, providing a responsive and user-friendly experience. Security posture is generally good with HTTPS enforced and domain transfer protections, though DNSSEC is not enabled and security headers are not evident. Privacy compliance is basic, with a privacy policy present but no cookie consent or terms of service pages found. Overall, the domain registration data aligns well with the business claims, indicating legitimacy and trustworthiness.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
58/ 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

6 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

  2. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • High

      No DMARC record found

      DMARC provides email authentication and reporting

      What to do: Add DMARC record: "v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@yourdomain.com"

  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 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

  4. DNS health

    DNS sends visitors and email to the right servers. Misconfigured records can cause outages or let someone redirect your traffic.

    • High

      Weak SPF Policy

      SPF record has permissive policy allowing any server to send email

      What to do: Use -all or ~all qualifier for better email security

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

Keep watching hs.coop

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. 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
75
Security headers
70
Email security
65
DNS health
65
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
58
Average
59

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 hs.coop, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for hs.coop right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

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

Hostsharing eG is a cooperative entity providing hosting and social networking services via Mastodon. Their market position is specialized, serving a community of members rather than the general public. The business model revolves around cooperative hosting and federated social media participation, likely funded by member contributions. The target audience is cooperative members and privacy-conscious social network users. The company has maintained consistent domain registration since 2018, supporting stable operations. The partnership ecosystem includes the broader Mastodon and Fediverse communities. Growth indicators are modest given the small active user base (21 active users). Strategic observations suggest a focus on community trust and decentralized social networking rather than commercial expansion.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level. HTTPS is properly configured, and the domain has clientTransferProhibited status to prevent unauthorized transfers. However, DNSSEC is not enabled, which could expose DNS spoofing risks. No advanced security headers like Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options were detected, representing an area for improvement. There is no published security policy or incident response contact information, which limits transparency and readiness. Privacy compliance is partial, with a privacy policy present but lacking cookie consent mechanisms. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files were found. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a small cooperative service but could benefit from enhancements to align with best practices and regulatory compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement and publish comprehensive security policies including incident response contacts.
  3. Add cookie consent mechanisms to comply with GDPR and improve privacy transparency.
  4. Deploy security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  5. Consider publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Hostsharing eG
Description
hostsharing.coop ist die Mastodon-Instanz für Mitglieder der Hostsharing eG. Sie wird seit 2018 von der Hosting-Genossenschaft betrieben.
Key services
Mastodon social networking hosting, Fediverse participation
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Mastodon 4.4.8, React, JavaScript ES Modules, Rails UJS, SVG icons
Frameworks
Ruby on Rails, React
Platforms
Fediverse, Mastodon
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Domain status clientTransferProhibited

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a Mastodon instance for a cooperative hosting community.
  2. Content is primarily in German with some English interface elements.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly listed on the explored page.
  4. No cookie consent or terms of service pages detected on this page.
  5. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found.
  6. No advertising or tracking scripts detected.
  7. Site uses modern JavaScript modules and React framework.
  8. WHOIS data is consistent and domain is not privacy protected.
  9. DNSSEC is not enabled, which is a minor security gap.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Mastodon 4.4.8, leveraging Ruby on Rails backend and React frontend frameworks. It uses modern JavaScript ES modules and SVG icons for UI elements. The site is mobile optimized and provides a good user experience with clear navigation and responsive design. Performance is moderate, with no evident heavy scripts or slow loading issues. SEO optimization is basic, with meta tags and Open Graph data present but no advanced structured data like JSON-LD. Accessibility features are basic but present. Hosting appears to be cooperative or self-hosted, consistent with the organization's profile. Technical risks include lack of DNSSEC and missing security headers, which could be addressed to improve resilience and 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 hs.coop. 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 hs.coop.

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.