Skip to main content

Security report for mostbet.com

E-commerce · N/a

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

52/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website 8unx689.com operates as an online sports betting platform branded as Mostbet. It targets sports bettors and gamblers with services focused on online sports betting. The site is relatively new, with domain registration dated November 2024, and uses multiple alternate domains for different language audiences. The business model is typical for online gambling, relying on user engagement through betting services. However, the site lacks visible company information, contact details, and legal policies, which impacts trust and credibility. Technically, the site uses modern JavaScript frameworks and SDKs such as AppsFlyer and Paybetget for marketing and tracking. Hosting appears to be on AWS infrastructure. The site is a single page application with moderate performance and basic mobile optimization. However, there is a lack of visible security headers and no DNSSEC enabled, which are areas for improvement. From a security perspective, the site shows minimal security best practices. The domain is protected against deletion and transfer but lacks DNSSEC and security headers. No privacy or cookie policies are present, and no contact or incident response information is provided. The site extensively tracks users via third-party SDKs, raising privacy concerns. The domain's newness and non-branded domain name reduce trustworthiness. Overall, the site scores low to moderate on content quality, technical implementation, security posture, privacy compliance, and business credibility. Strategic recommendations include adding comprehensive privacy and cookie policies, improving security headers and DNS security, providing clear contact and incident response information, and enhancing transparency about the business entity to improve trust and compliance.

Scanned

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. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

  2. 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';…

  3. 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

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

Keep watching mostbet.com

This scan found 25 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
72
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
75
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
50
Average
52

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 online gambling sector, specifically sports betting, targeting a global or regional audience through multiple localized domains. The business model is transactional, generating revenue from betting activities. The use of multiple alternate domains suggests a strategy to reach diverse linguistic markets. The lack of clear company information and new domain registration indicate a startup or recently launched operation. The partnership ecosystem includes marketing and tracking SDKs but no visible formal partners. Growth indicators are limited due to lack of public business data. Competitive advantages are unclear due to minimal content and transparency.

Security posture

The security maturity level is low to moderate. The domain uses registrar locks to prevent unauthorized deletion or transfer but lacks DNSSEC, which is a significant DNS security gap. No security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options are detected, increasing risk of common web attacks. The site uses HTTPS but no detailed SSL configuration is visible. No privacy or cookie policies are present, indicating compliance gaps with GDPR and other regulations. Incident response readiness is not demonstrated due to lack of contact channels. The extensive use of third-party tracking SDKs without visible consent mechanisms raises privacy concerns. Overall, the security culture appears immature and needs significant improvements.

Recommendations

  1. Implement DNSSEC to secure DNS infrastructure and prevent spoofing.
  2. Add comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance statements.
  3. Deploy security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Provide clear contact information including security incident response contacts.
  5. Increase transparency about business ownership and legal entity to improve trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Online sports betting platform
Key services
Sports betting, Online gambling
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, AppsFlyer SDK, Paybetget SDK, AWS DNS, SPA (Single Page Application)
Frameworks
React (implied by SPA and root div), AppsFlyer
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
40/100
Good practices seen
  • Domain status includes clientDeleteProhibited and clientTransferProhibited

Analytics and tracking

Services
AppsFlyer
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
AppsFlyer
Marketing tools
AppsFlyer SDK, Paybetget SDK
Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
basic
User experience
basic
Content relevance
basic
Navigation
basic
Professionalism
basic
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website is an online sports betting platform branded as Mostbet.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the main page.
  3. No contact information or company details provided.
  4. Uses multiple external domains for alternate language versions.
  5. Includes tracking and marketing SDKs such as AppsFlyer and Paybetget.
  6. No visible security headers or advanced security configurations.
  7. Domain is very new and registered with Porkbun LLC without privacy protection.
  8. Content is minimal and mostly technical/scripts with no visible user-facing content in the HTML snapshot.
  9. No forms detected in the HTML content provided.
  10. No social media links or emails found.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built as a single page application likely using React or similar frameworks, with asynchronous loading of JavaScript SDKs for marketing and tracking. Hosting is on AWS infrastructure as indicated by DNS servers. Performance is moderate with some optimization for mobile devices. SEO and accessibility features are basic, with minimal metadata and no structured data or Open Graph tags detected. No CMS is identified. The technical stack is modern but lacks advanced security configurations and comprehensive metadata for SEO and accessibility. Technical debt appears moderate due to missing security and compliance features.
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. 53/100Medium32 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with mostbet.com. 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 mostbet.com.

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.