Skip to main content

Security report for linkjago.me

Privacy service provided by Withheld for Privacy ehf · Technology · Iceland

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Link Jago is a small, technology-focused business offering a free and open source URL shortening service with features such as custom domains, link management, statistics, and API access. The service targets users and developers seeking an alternative to proprietary URL shorteners, positioning itself as a niche open source solution. The website is built using modern web technologies including Next.js and React, hosted behind Cloudflare DNS, and integrates Google reCAPTCHA for bot protection. However, the site suffers from slow load times and lacks a valid SSL/TLS certificate, resulting in no HTTPS support which is a critical security concern. Security headers are minimal, with only HSTS enabled, and no DMARC or DNSSEC records are present. Privacy compliance is weak, with no privacy or cookie policies found, and no contact or incident response information provided. The domain is registered with privacy protection, which is reasonable for a small open source project but reduces transparency. Overall, the site demonstrates moderate professionalism and technical maturity but requires significant improvements in security and privacy compliance to enhance trust and protect users.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 100 · Critical
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. 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: Google APIs

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

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

Keep watching linkjago.me

This scan found 16 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
95
Security headers
65
Email security
50
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
68

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 business operates in the technology sector, providing an open source URL shortening platform that appeals to developers and users needing customizable short links. Its business model is likely community-driven with potential for self-hosting deployments. The presence of browser extensions and API access indicates a focus on developer-friendly features. The company is small and relatively new, founded in 2023, with no visible parent or subsidiary companies. The open source nature and GitHub presence support transparency and community engagement, although the lack of direct contact information and privacy policies may hinder broader adoption. The partnership with The Devs network and GitHub suggests a collaborative ecosystem. Growth potential exists if security and compliance gaps are addressed.

Security posture

The security posture is currently weak due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS support, exposing users to potential interception risks. While HSTS is enabled, the lack of modern TLS protocols, OCSP stapling, and session resumption reduces security and performance. No DMARC or DNSSEC records are configured, increasing risk of email spoofing and DNS attacks. The use of privacy-protected WHOIS registration is understandable but limits transparency. No published security policy or incident response contacts are available, which is a compliance and trust gap. The site is free from known SSL vulnerabilities like Heartbleed or POODLE but requires urgent remediation of fundamental HTTPS issues. Overall, the security score is low, and improvements are critical to protect users and maintain credibility.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the site immediately.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3) and disable insecure versions to improve security.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and build user trust.
  4. Add contact information and a security policy including incident response contacts (e.g., security@ or abuse@ emails).
  5. Implement DMARC and consider DNSSEC to enhance domain and email security.
  6. Optimize website performance to reduce load times and improve user experience.
  7. Consider adding analytics with privacy-respecting configurations to better understand user behavior.
  8. Enhance accessibility features and SEO optimization for broader reach and compliance.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern React/Next.js stack, leveraging server-side rendering and client-side hydration. It uses Google reCAPTCHA for bot mitigation and Cloudflare for DNS hosting. Despite modern technologies, the site suffers from slow load times (18+ seconds) and a large page size (~225 KB) with many resources (86). No CMS is detected, indicating a custom or framework-based build. The SSL configuration is incomplete with no valid certificate and no TLS protocols enabled, severely impacting security and user trust. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and uses Google Fonts for typography. SEO meta tags and Open Graph tags are present but contain some placeholders (e.g., og:url and og:image with 'undefined'). Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid but requires urgent security and performance improvements.
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 linkjago.me. 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 linkjago.me.

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.