Skip to main content

Security report for meter.net

Meter.net · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

70/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Meter.net operates as an internet speed testing platform offering users the ability to measure download, upload, and ping speeds from multiple global servers. The service targets general internet users, gamers, and website owners who may embed the speed test plugin. The website is professionally designed with multilingual support and provides detailed explanations of test metrics, enhancing user understanding and engagement. Despite the professional front, the absence of WHOIS domain registration data raises concerns about domain legitimacy and ownership transparency. Technically, the site employs modern web technologies and integrates advertising and consent management platforms, reflecting a mature digital infrastructure. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS and cookie consent but lacks explicit security headers and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms. Overall, the site is functional and trustworthy from a user perspective but requires domain registration clarity and enhanced security practices to improve credibility and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
65/ 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

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 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

  3. 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 Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1
    • 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 meter.net

This scan found 23 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
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
65
Average
70

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

Meter.net positions itself as a niche service provider in the internet speed testing market, competing with other global speed test platforms. Its business model relies on free user access supplemented by advertising revenue and optional web plugin services for third-party websites. The company appears to have a small operational size with a focused technology sector presence. The multilingual approach and global server network indicate an ambition for broad market reach. However, the lack of transparent domain registration and limited direct contact information may hinder trust and partnership opportunities. The partnership with HostZealot.com for server hosting suggests reliance on third-party infrastructure. Strategic growth could involve enhancing transparency, expanding direct customer engagement channels, and formalizing security and compliance certifications.

Security posture

The website demonstrates baseline security measures including enforced HTTPS and GDPR-compliant cookie consent. However, the absence of visible security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options reduces defense-in-depth. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure policy is present, limiting external security collaboration. The lack of direct security contact channels further constrains incident response readiness. No known vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The missing WHOIS data is a critical concern impacting trust and domain legitimacy. To elevate security maturity, the organization should implement comprehensive security headers, publish a security policy, establish incident response contacts, and clarify domain ownership. These steps will mitigate risks and enhance stakeholder confidence.

Recommendations

  1. Clarify and publish domain registration details to resolve WHOIS inconsistencies.
  2. Implement standard security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options) to strengthen site security.
  3. Publish a security.txt file and vulnerability disclosure policy to facilitate responsible reporting.
  4. Enhance contact information with verified company emails and phone numbers for support and security.
  5. Conduct regular audits of third-party scripts and advertising integrations to minimize security risks.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Meter.net
Description
Meter.net provides an internet speed test service allowing users to check download, upload, and ping speeds from multiple global locations. It also offers embedding plugins for websites and publishes related news articles.
Key services
Internet speed testing, Ping testing, Speed test web plugin, Internet speed statistics and news
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, HTML5, CSS3, SVG, Prebid.js, Google DoubleClick, FusePlatform Ads, InMobi CMP
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google DoubleClick, InMobi, FusePlatform
Tracking pixels
Quantcast, AdsafeProtected
Marketing tools
Consent Management Platform (InMobi CMP)
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website provides a functional internet speed test service with global server options.
  2. Content is well structured with detailed explanations of test metrics.
  3. Multilingual support via alternate hreflang links.
  4. Use of modern web technologies and advertising networks.
  5. Cookie consent and privacy policy present indicating GDPR awareness.
  6. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found; contact via web form only.
  7. WHOIS data missing, domain registration status unclear.
  8. No explicit security.txt or vulnerability disclosure found.
  9. No visible security headers detected in HTML content.
  10. Mobile responsive design with dark mode support.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern technology stack including HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, and SVG graphics. It integrates multiple advertising and consent management platforms such as Google DoubleClick, InMobi CMP, and FusePlatform, indicating monetization and compliance sophistication. The site is mobile responsive with dark mode support, enhancing user experience across devices. Hosting for test servers is provided by HostZealot.com, a third-party provider. Performance is moderate with asynchronous script loading and preloading optimizations. However, the absence of a detected CMS suggests a custom or static site architecture, which may impact scalability. Accessibility features are basic and could be improved for compliance. SEO is adequately addressed with meta tags and hreflang attributes for multilingual support. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid but could benefit from enhanced security configurations and accessibility 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 meter.net. 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 meter.net.

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.