Skip to main content

Security report for matrix.to

Matrix.org Foundation C.I.C. · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

67/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Matrix.to is a web service facilitating the creation of shareable links to Matrix rooms, users, or messages, supporting the Matrix open network for decentralized and secure communication. The website targets users and communities engaged in Matrix-based messaging, providing a simple interface to generate links without dependency on specific client apps. The service is part of the broader Matrix ecosystem, which is recognized for its open standards and secure communication protocols. Technically, the website uses JavaScript and CSS with client-side processing to preserve user privacy. The site is moderately optimized for performance and mobile use but lacks advanced accessibility and SEO features. No CMS or hosting provider details are evident from the content. The site includes links to open source GitHub repositories, enhancing transparency and community trust. From a security perspective, the site uses client-side processing to minimize data exposure but lacks published privacy and cookie policies, security headers, and explicit contact information for incident response. No vulnerabilities or malicious content were detected. The domain registration aligns well with the Matrix.org Foundation, indicating legitimacy and trustworthiness. Overall, the site is functional and trustworthy but would benefit from improved privacy compliance, security headers, and contact transparency to enhance user trust and regulatory adherence.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of matrix.to. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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

8 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 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

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

Keep watching matrix.to

This scan found 19 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
30
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention matrix.to, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for matrix.to right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

Monitor on Breach (opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Matrix.to operates within the technology sector as part of the Matrix ecosystem, providing tools to facilitate decentralized communication. Its business model is community and foundation-supported, focusing on open standards rather than direct monetization. The service targets technically savvy users and communities seeking secure messaging solutions. The presence of open source projects and GitHub links indicates a collaborative development approach. Market positioning is strong within the niche of decentralized communication protocols, with growing adoption. The lack of direct contact information and formal policies suggests a primarily community-driven rather than commercial operation. Strategic partnerships are implied through the Matrix.org domain and GitHub presence.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security posture with client-side processing to protect user privacy. However, it lacks several best practices such as security headers (e.g., Content-Security-Policy), published privacy and cookie policies, and explicit incident response contacts. No known vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the provided content. The absence of HTTPS information limits full assessment but is assumed given the domain. Compliance with GDPR and other regulations is unclear due to missing policies. Overall, the security culture appears privacy-conscious but could be improved with formal documentation and technical controls.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Implement security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Provide clear contact information for security incidents and general inquiries.
  4. Enhance mobile optimization and accessibility features to improve user experience.
  5. Establish a vulnerability disclosure policy and security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Matrix.org Foundation C.I.C.
Description
Matrix.to is a service that creates shareable links to Matrix rooms, users, or messages without being tied to any specific app. It supports the Matrix open network for secure, decentralized communication.
Key services
Link creation for Matrix rooms, users, and messages, Facilitating access to Matrix communication clients, Supporting decentralized and secure communication
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, RegeneratorRuntime, CSS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
60/100
Good practices seen
  • Client-side processing to preserve privacy

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website provides a focused utility for Matrix network users.
  2. No privacy or cookie policies found, which is a compliance gap.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly provided on the page.
  4. Open source links to GitHub projects enhance transparency.
  5. No advertising or tracking detected, indicating privacy-conscious design.
  6. Minimal SEO and accessibility features present.
  7. No security headers detected in provided data; potential improvement area.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern JavaScript-based front end with CSS styling and client-side processing to preserve privacy. The absence of a detected CMS suggests a custom or static site approach. Performance is moderate with basic mobile responsiveness. SEO is basic with meta tags but lacks advanced structured data or Open Graph beyond Twitter cards. No analytics or tracking scripts were detected, aligning with privacy goals. The technical stack is minimal but effective for the site's purpose. Opportunities exist to improve accessibility, SEO, and security headers to reduce technical debt and enhance 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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 67/100Medium28 findingsView report
  2. 67/100 +2Medium28 findingsView report
  3. 65/100Medium24 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with matrix.to. 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 matrix.to.

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.