Skip to main content

Security report for masto.ai

Private by Design, LLC · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

72/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Masto.ai operates as an independent Mastodon server providing a federated social media platform accessible to a general audience interested in decentralized social networking. The platform is built on Mastodon version 4.3.4 and leverages Cloudflare for DNS and hosting infrastructure, ensuring reliable performance and availability. The website content is rich with user-generated posts, demonstrating active community engagement and a functional social media environment. However, the site lacks comprehensive privacy and cookie policies, and no direct contact or security incident response information is provided, which may impact user trust and compliance with privacy regulations. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS enforced and domain registration protections in place, but improvements are needed in security headers and privacy compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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

3 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 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

  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 masto.ai

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
75
Security headers
70
Email security
55
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
72

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 is positioned as a small technology entity focused on providing Mastodon social networking services within the fediverse. It targets a broad audience interested in federated social media without ads or algorithms. The business model is based on hosting and community engagement rather than direct monetization or advertising. The domain registration is consistent with the business entity, indicating legitimacy. The lack of visible contact information and formal policies suggests a community-driven or volunteer-operated model rather than a commercial enterprise. Partnerships or subsidiaries are not evident, and the platform relies on open-source Mastodon software, indicating a focus on transparency and decentralization.

Security posture

The security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled and domain status locks preventing unauthorized transfers or deletions. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options reduces the overall security robustness. No vulnerability disclosures or incident response policies are published, which may hinder timely response to security events. The site does not implement cookie consent mechanisms, potentially impacting GDPR compliance. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. Overall, the security maturity is moderate but could benefit from formalized policies and enhanced technical controls.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC to improve domain name system security and prevent DNS spoofing.
  2. Implement standard security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with explicit GDPR compliance statements and consent mechanisms.
  4. Provide clear contact information for security incidents, including abuse and security email addresses.
  5. Regularly audit and update the technology stack to ensure no vulnerable libraries or components are in use.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Private by Design, LLC
Description
A general Mastodon server for all languages.
Key services
Mastodon social networking, Federated social media access
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Mastodon 4.3.4, Ruby on Rails (implied), React (implied by chunk.js and React Helmet)
Frameworks
Mastodon
Platforms
Fediverse
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Domain locked with clientDeleteProhibited and clientTransferProhibited

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a Mastodon instance explore page with active user content
  2. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found
  3. No cookie consent or terms of service pages detected
  4. Uses Cloudflare DNS and nameservers but no DNSSEC
  5. No visible security headers in HTML content
  6. Content is user-generated social posts with no adult or suspicious content
  7. Website uses Mastodon version 4.3.4
  8. No advertising or tracking scripts detected
  9. Privacy policy page exists but is basic and lacks GDPR compliance indicators
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the Mastodon platform version 4.3.4, utilizing modern web technologies including React and chunked JavaScript assets for performance optimization. Hosting is provided via Cloudflare DNS and nameservers, though DNSSEC is not enabled. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and basic accessibility features. SEO is supported through proper meta tags and Open Graph data. Performance is moderate with no evident blocking scripts or heavy advertising. The technical infrastructure is solid for a community-driven social platform but lacks advanced security configurations and formal compliance mechanisms.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 72/100Medium28 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with masto.ai. 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 masto.ai.

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.