Skip to main content

Security report for ninee.xyz

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

72/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website ninee.neocities.org is a personal homepage primarily serving as a curated links page to various social, development, and personal interest sites. It does not represent a commercial business or organization and lacks detailed business information or contact data. The site is hosted on Neocities, a platform popular for personal and hobbyist web projects. The technical infrastructure is minimal, relying on basic HTML and CSS without advanced frameworks or CMS. Security posture is limited, with no detected security headers or privacy policies, and no HTTPS status information available from the data. The site content is safe, general audience appropriate, and free from adult or questionable material. Overall, the site is functional but basic, with room for improvement in security and privacy 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

4 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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

  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

    • 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 ninee.xyz

This scan found 21 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
95
Security headers
45
Email security
65
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
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

Given the personal nature of the site, there is no clear business model, revenue stream, or market positioning. The site owner appears to be an individual or hobbyist sharing links to their projects and social profiles. The external links suggest engagement with open source and decentralized social platforms. There are no indications of partnerships, subsidiaries, or formal business operations. The site’s simplicity and lack of commercial content limit its business intelligence value.

Security posture

The security posture is minimal. No HTTPS confirmation or security headers were detected in the provided data. There are no forms or data collection points, reducing attack surface but also limiting user engagement. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates non-compliance with GDPR and other privacy regulations. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is present. The WHOIS data is privacy protected or unavailable, which is common for personal sites but reduces transparency. Overall, the site poses low risk but also lacks security best practices.

Recommendations

  1. Enable HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate to secure user connections.
  2. Implement standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Add privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance with data protection regulations.
  4. Provide clear contact information or a contact form to enhance trust and communication.
  5. Consider adding basic analytics with privacy-respecting configurations to understand visitor behavior.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Personal website currently serving as a links page with various external links to social and development platforms.
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS
Platforms
Neocities
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
30/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a personal homepage with a collection of external links.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers provided.
  4. No forms or data collection mechanisms present.
  5. No scripts or external libraries detected.
  6. No security headers or advanced security configurations detected.
  7. Content is minimal and basic but accessible.
  8. No adult or questionable content detected.
  9. WHOIS data is unavailable due to malformed request and privacy protection.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses basic HTML5 and CSS without any detected JavaScript frameworks or CMS. It is hosted on Neocities, which provides simple static hosting. The site is moderately optimized for mobile but lacks advanced accessibility features. SEO optimization is basic with minimal meta tags and no structured data. Performance is expected to be moderate given the simple content and static hosting. There is no evidence of technical debt or complex infrastructure, but modernization opportunities include adding HTTPS, improving accessibility, and enhancing SEO.
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 ninee.xyz. 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 ninee.xyz.

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.