Skip to main content

Security report for indieauth.net

Technology · N/a

High risk. 9 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

47/100

Risk levelHigh

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

IndieAuth.net serves as an informational and specification website for the IndieAuth protocol, a decentralized identity solution built on OAuth 2.0. The site targets developers and website owners interested in decentralized authentication, providing detailed documentation, tutorials, and links to self-hosted and public IndieAuth providers. The business model is community and open-source driven, focusing on protocol adoption rather than commercial services. Technically, the site is a simple static HTML/CSS implementation hosted on Linode, with no detected CMS or complex frameworks. The site performs moderately with basic mobile optimization and accessibility features. Security posture is moderate; while HTTPS is implied (not explicitly stated in data), DNSSEC is not enabled and no security headers are detected, indicating room for improvement. No privacy or cookie policies are present, and no contact or incident response information is provided, which impacts compliance and trust. Overall, the site is trustworthy within its niche but would benefit from enhanced security and privacy disclosures.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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

9 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

  2. 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 Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1
    • 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';…

  3. 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

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

Keep watching indieauth.net

This scan found 27 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
15
Email security
60
DNS health
75
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
50
Average
47

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

IndieAuth.net occupies a niche position in the decentralized identity and OAuth ecosystem, primarily serving the IndieWeb community and developers seeking decentralized authentication solutions. Its competitive advantage lies in its open protocol approach, avoiding centralized identity providers and enabling users to authenticate with URLs they control. The business model is non-commercial, focusing on protocol specification and community adoption. The site references multiple open-source IndieAuth providers and software, indicating a collaborative ecosystem. Growth indicators include ongoing updates to the specification and community engagement via linked resources. The absence of direct commercial offerings or contact information suggests a primarily informational and community-driven operation.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic security posture with some good practices such as domain transfer protection. However, the lack of DNSSEC, absence of security headers, and no published security or incident response policies indicate gaps in security maturity. No forms or data collection mechanisms reduce attack surface but also limit user engagement. The site does not provide GDPR or privacy compliance information, which could be a concern for European users. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file is present, limiting transparency for security researchers. Overall, the security posture is adequate for an informational site but should be improved to align with best practices for trust and compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Publish clear privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  4. Add contact information and a security policy including incident response contacts to facilitate communication and transparency.
  5. Consider adding a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
IndieAuth is a decentralized identity protocol built on top of OAuth 2.0 that enables individual websites to act as identity providers, allowing users and applications to authenticate using URLs without needing API keys or new accounts.
Key services
Decentralized identity protocol, OAuth 2.0 based authentication, IndieAuth specification and tutorials, Links to self-hosted and public IndieAuth providers
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS, OAuth 2.0
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
60/100
Good practices seen
  • Domain status clientTransferProhibited to prevent unauthorized transfers

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
high

Key observations

  1. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the site.
  2. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses provided.
  3. No forms or data collection mechanisms detected.
  4. No social media links explicitly present on the page.
  5. No scripts or external JavaScript libraries detected in the HTML head or body.
  6. Website content is static HTML with CSS styling.
  7. Focus on decentralized identity and OAuth 2.0 protocol education and specification.
  8. References to multiple open source IndieAuth providers and software.
  9. No advertising or tracking technologies detected.
  10. No security policy or incident response information published.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with simple static HTML and CSS, without detected JavaScript frameworks or CMS platforms. Hosting is provided by Linode, a reputable VPS provider. The site references OAuth 2.0 and decentralized identity protocols but does not implement complex client-side technologies. Performance is moderate, with basic mobile responsiveness and accessibility. SEO optimization is basic, with minimal meta tags and no structured data or Open Graph tags detected. The lack of analytics or tracking scripts indicates minimal user tracking, aligning with privacy-conscious design. Technical debt appears low due to simplicity, but modernization opportunities include adding structured data, improving accessibility, and enhancing security headers.
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 indieauth.net. 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 indieauth.net.

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.