Skip to main content

Security report for inferium.io

Inferium · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

71/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Inferium operates as a specialized AI infrastructure platform focusing on verifiable inference and AI agents, targeting AI developers and model creators. The platform offers services such as AI model evaluation, benchmarking, deployment, and staking, positioning itself as a niche player in the AI technology sector. The website content emphasizes trust and verifiability in AI performance, aiming to build a community around AI model contributions and rewards. Technically, the website is a modern single-page application leveraging React, Google Fonts, Google Analytics, and Google Ads, hosted likely behind Cloudflare with Turnstile captcha for bot mitigation. The site demonstrates good design quality, mobile optimization, and SEO practices but lacks visible privacy and cookie policies, which impacts compliance assessment. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and bot protection but could be improved by adding explicit security headers and publishing incident response information. WHOIS data is unavailable or malformed, limiting domain trust evaluation and reducing overall business credibility. Overall, the site is professional and safe but would benefit from enhanced transparency and compliance documentation.

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

5 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 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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, Cloudflare, Google APIs

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

  2. 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

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

Keep watching inferium.io

This scan found 20 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
75
Security headers
70
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
71

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

Inferium targets the AI developer market with a platform that incentivizes AI model creation and performance verification through verifiable inference and staking mechanisms. Its business model revolves around providing infrastructure and tools for AI benchmarking and deployment, likely generating revenue through platform usage and staking services. The presence of dedicated subdomains for forums and nodes suggests an ecosystem approach fostering community engagement and decentralized infrastructure. The company appears to be a small technology entity with no public parent or subsidiary affiliations. The lack of public contact details and company registration information limits external validation but the branding and service offering indicate a focused and innovative market position within AI infrastructure. Strategic partnerships or integrations with blockchain and decentralized technologies are implied but not explicitly detailed.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and integrates Cloudflare Turnstile captcha to mitigate automated abuse, reflecting a baseline security maturity. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options reduces defense-in-depth. No explicit privacy, cookie, or incident response policies are published, which may expose compliance gaps especially under GDPR or similar regulations. The malformed WHOIS data and lack of registrant transparency raise concerns about domain legitimacy and trust. No vulnerability disclosures or security.txt files are present, limiting external security collaboration. Overall, the security posture is moderate with room for improvement in policy transparency, header implementation, and registrant data clarity to enhance trust and compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Add standard security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to strengthen security posture.
  3. Provide clear contact information including security incident response contacts and consider publishing a security.txt file.
  4. Improve WHOIS transparency by ensuring accurate and complete domain registration data is publicly available or justified if privacy protected.
  5. Enhance accessibility features and conduct regular security audits to identify and remediate potential vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Inferium
Description
The AI infrastructure hub for verifiable inference and agents. Be rewarded for your creations, performance, and feedback. Build, test, and optimize AI models confidently.
Key services
Verifiable AI inference, AI agents, AI model evaluation, AI benchmarking, Inference API, AI model deployment, Staking, Analytics
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, React (implied by JSX and SPA structure), Google Fonts, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Google Ads (gtag.js), Google Identity Services, Cloudflare Turnstile Captcha
Frameworks
React
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Cloudflare Turnstile captcha for bot protection
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Ads
Marketing tools
Google Identity Services
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a modern SPA focused on AI infrastructure and developer tools.
  2. No visible privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on homepage HTML.
  3. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses found in HTML content.
  4. Use of Google services for analytics and ads is evident.
  5. Cloudflare Turnstile captcha is included but not blocking access.
  6. WHOIS data is unavailable or malformed, limiting domain trust assessment.
  7. No explicit security or incident response policies published.
  8. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found.
  9. Website content is safe and suitable for general audiences.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built as a modern React single-page application with asynchronous loading of scripts and use of Google Fonts for typography. It integrates Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics for tracking and marketing purposes, alongside Google Ads for advertising. Hosting appears to be behind Cloudflare, leveraging its Turnstile captcha for bot protection. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and SEO meta tags present. However, accessibility features are basic and could be improved. The absence of a CMS suggests a custom or static site generation approach. Technical risks include reliance on third-party tracking and advertising scripts, and lack of explicit security headers. Opportunities exist to modernize security configurations and enhance compliance documentation to reduce technical debt and improve operational resilience.
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 inferium.io. 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 inferium.io.

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.