Skip to main content

Security report for lea.pet

Private by Design, LLC · Technology · United States

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

Security score

67/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website lea.pet is a personal instance of the Sharkey social platform, designed for a small community of friends. It operates under the domain registered to Private by Design, LLC, a US-based organization. The site offers social networking services with a focus on personal and community content sharing. The business model is niche and community-oriented, with no commercial or enterprise scale indications. The technical infrastructure uses modern web technologies including JavaScript and CSS, with a custom theme and no detected CMS. Hosting details are not explicit, and the domain uses suspicious name servers which may pose security concerns. The site is accessible without WAF or blocking mechanisms and shows moderate performance and mobile optimization. Security posture is average with no DNSSEC and missing security headers, and privacy compliance is weak due to lack of privacy and cookie policies. The site contains adult-themed content and links, targeting a mature audience without age verification. Overall, the site is functional but has notable security and compliance gaps that should be addressed to improve trust and safety.

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 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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Twitter, YouTube

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

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

Keep watching lea.pet

This scan found 22 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
52
Security headers
45
Email security
85
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
67

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

Lea.pet serves a small, personal community using the Sharkey social platform, positioning itself as a niche social instance rather than a commercial enterprise. The business operates under Private by Design, LLC, founded in 2022, indicating a recent startup or personal project. The site leverages open-source social software and integrates various external links, some of which are adult-themed or explicit. There is no evidence of monetization or affiliate partnerships. The target audience is mature users interested in social networking within a private circle. The ecosystem includes links to various external domains, some suspicious, which may affect reputation. Growth indicators and partnerships are minimal, reflecting a small-scale operation.

Security posture

Security maturity is moderate with domain registration protections in place but lacking DNSSEC and security headers. The use of suspicious name servers (ns1.cybercrime.gay and ns2.cybercrime.gay) is a significant concern that could expose the domain to DNS hijacking or other attacks. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are published. The site does not implement GDPR-compliant privacy or cookie policies, which is a compliance gap. No analytics or tracking scripts reduce privacy risks but also limit security monitoring. The presence of adult content without age verification increases risk exposure. Overall, the security posture requires improvements in DNS security, policy transparency, and content safety controls.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC and switch to reputable name servers to secure DNS infrastructure.
  2. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  3. Implement security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  4. Add incident response and vulnerability disclosure information to enhance security readiness.
  5. Introduce age verification or content warnings for adult-themed content to improve content safety.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Private by Design, LLC
Description
Personal Sharkey instance for me and my friends <3
Key services
Social networking via Sharkey instance, Content sharing and communication
Content quality
good
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, CSS, HTML5, FontFace API, Misskey social platform
Frameworks
Sharkey (Misskey fork)
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
50/100
Good practices seen
  • Domain status includes clientDeleteProhibited and clientTransferProhibited

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a personal Sharkey social platform instance for a small community.
  2. No privacy or cookie policy found, but terms of service are present.
  3. Contact email is provided in metadata but no phone or physical address found.
  4. Website uses modern JavaScript and CSS with a custom theme.
  5. Multiple external links to adult and explicit content domains.
  6. No security headers or DNSSEC enabled; name servers are suspicious.
  7. No visible forms for data collection on the main page.
  8. No analytics or tracking scripts detected.
  9. Content is mostly safe for mature audiences but contains explicit references.
  10. No WAF or blocking detected; site is fully accessible.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern JavaScript and CSS tech stack with a custom Sharkey theme. It loads multiple external resources and prefetches images for performance. The site is mobile optimized and accessible but lacks advanced SEO and accessibility features. No CMS is detected, indicating a custom or self-hosted platform. Hosting provider details are not explicit. The domain registrar is Porkbun LLC, a reputable registrar. Performance is moderate with no major errors detected. However, the use of suspicious name servers and lack of DNSSEC represent technical risks. The site does not use common analytics or marketing tools, reducing tracking but also limiting insights.
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 lea.pet. 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 lea.pet.

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.