Skip to main content

Security report for make.co

Make: Community · Media · N/a

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

Security score

63/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Make: Community is an established media and community platform dedicated to makers, creatives, and innovators since 2005. It nurtures a global cultural movement celebrating creativity and innovation. The website leverages WordPress with BuddyPress to provide social and community features, supported by modern technologies such as Elementor and various analytics and marketing tools. The platform targets a broad maker audience and positions itself as a key player in the maker media space. Technically, the site is well-structured with good mobile optimization and SEO practices, though performance is moderate. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and authentication via Auth0, but lacks visible security headers and formal security policies. Privacy compliance is weak due to missing privacy and cookie policies and extensive tracking without clear consent mechanisms. Overall, the site is professional and trustworthy but would benefit from enhanced privacy and security transparency.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
70/ 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

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 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';…

  2. 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

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

Keep watching make.co

This scan found 26 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
42
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
70
Average
63

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 as a media and community platform focused on makers and creative individuals. Its competitive advantage lies in its long-standing presence since 2005 and its active engagement with a niche community. Revenue streams likely include advertising, memberships, and event hosting. The target customers are makers, hobbyists, and innovators globally. The company maintains partnerships with major social media platforms and uses third-party services for analytics and authentication. Growth indicators include active social media presence and continuous content updates. Strategic observations suggest opportunities to improve privacy compliance and security transparency to enhance user trust.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and use of Auth0 for authentication. However, it lacks explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options, which are important for mitigating common web attacks. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are found, indicating gaps in security governance. The extensive use of third-party tracking scripts increases the attack surface and privacy risks. There is no evidence of exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries in the provided content. Compliance with GDPR and other privacy regulations appears insufficient due to missing policies and consent mechanisms. Overall, the security posture is functional but requires improvements in policy transparency and technical controls.

Recommendations

  1. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance statements.
  2. Implement security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Establish and publicize an incident response and vulnerability disclosure policy.
  4. Review and minimize third-party tracking scripts to reduce privacy risks.
  5. Enhance form security with CSRF tokens and input validation.
  6. Improve accessibility features to meet WCAG standards.
  7. Regularly audit plugins and third-party libraries for vulnerabilities.
  8. Provide clear and accessible contact information for security and privacy inquiries.
  9. Implement a cookie consent mechanism to comply with privacy regulations.
  10. Increase transparency around data retention and user data handling.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Make: Community
Description
Make: has been elevating makers, nurturing a global cultural movement, and celebrating creativity, innovation and curiosity since 2005.
Key services
Community engagement, Content publishing, Event hosting
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Elementor, jQuery, MediaPress, Ultimate Elementor Widgets, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Pinterest Pixel, Auth0
Frameworks
WordPress, BuddyPress
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Use of Auth0 for authentication

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Pinterest Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, Pinterest Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag
Marketing tools
Facebook Pixel, Pinterest Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Auth0
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a community platform for makers and creatives.
  2. Uses WordPress CMS with BuddyPress for social features.
  3. No explicit privacy or cookie policies found on the homepage HTML.
  4. Extensive use of third-party analytics and tracking pixels.
  5. No visible contact emails or phone numbers in the provided HTML.
  6. No security headers explicitly detected in the HTML content.
  7. Good use of HTTPS and modern web technologies.
  8. No signs of adult or NSFW content.
  9. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with BuddyPress for community features and Elementor for page building. It uses jQuery and various plugins such as MediaPress and Ultimate Elementor Widgets. Analytics and marketing tools include Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Pinterest Pixel, and LinkedIn Insight Tag. Authentication is handled via Auth0. The site loads multiple minified CSS and JS files, indicating optimization efforts. Performance is moderate, with some deferred and lazy-loaded scripts. Mobile optimization is good, and SEO meta tags are properly implemented. However, no explicit security headers were detected in the HTML. The site uses HTTPS with a valid SSL configuration. Hosting provider details are not explicitly found. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern but could benefit from enhanced security configurations and privacy controls.
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 make.co. 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 make.co.

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.