Skip to main content

Security report for no-one.nl

Other · N/a

High risk. 11 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Email security and 2 other checks.

Security score

39/100

Risk levelHigh

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

The website no-one.nl is a minimalistic domain-for-sale landing page offering the premium domain name for purchase. It targets domain investors or buyers interested in acquiring this specific domain. The site provides a simple form to request an offer, protected by Google reCAPTCHA v2 to prevent spam submissions. However, the site lacks any privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies, and does not provide any contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses, which limits trust and transparency. Technically, the site uses common front-end technologies such as Bootstrap, Font Awesome, Animate.css, Google Fonts, and jQuery. The form uses Google reCAPTCHA v2 for bot protection. The site appears to be served over HTTP without HTTPS, which is a significant security concern. No security headers or advanced security frameworks are detected. The site is basic in design and mobile optimization, with moderate performance. From a security perspective, the absence of HTTPS and security headers reduces the security posture significantly. The use of reCAPTCHA is a positive measure against spam. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The lack of privacy and cookie policies indicates poor privacy compliance. WHOIS data shows privacy protection for the registrant, which is typical for domain sales but reduces transparency. Overall, the website scores low on trustworthiness and professionalism due to minimal content, lack of business information, and poor security practices. Strategic recommendations include implementing HTTPS, adding privacy and cookie policies, providing clear contact information, and improving security headers and compliance measures.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 100 · Critical
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

11 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.

    • Critical

      EU business without adequate privacy measures

      EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

      What to do: Implement comprehensive GDPR compliance including privacy policy, cookie consent, and data protection measures

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

  2. 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

  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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  4. 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

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

Keep watching no-one.nl

This scan found 26 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
0
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
Average
39

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 no-one.nl, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for no-one.nl 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

The business model is domain resale, targeting buyers interested in premium domain names. The site positions itself as a marketplace participant offering a single premium domain for sale. There are no indications of additional services or partnerships. The target audience is domain investors and buyers. The site does not provide revenue streams or growth indicators. The lack of business information and contact details limits competitive advantage and market presence. No partnerships or subsidiaries are indicated.

Security posture

The current security maturity is low due to the absence of HTTPS and security headers. The use of Google reCAPTCHA v2 is a positive control against automated spam. There are no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data in the HTML content. Compliance gaps exist due to missing privacy and cookie policies and no incident response contacts. The domain uses privacy protection in WHOIS, which is justified for this business type but reduces transparency. Incident response readiness and security culture indicators are not present.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate to secure all site traffic.
  2. Add comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and inform users.
  3. Provide clear contact information including email and phone for business and security incidents.
  4. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  5. Enhance form security with server-side validation and consider adding terms of service.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
The website is a landing page indicating that the premium domain no-one.nl is available for sale. It invites visitors to request an offer to purchase the domain.
Key services
Domain sale offer submission
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap, Font Awesome, Animate.css, Google Fonts (Raleway), jQuery, Google reCAPTCHA v2
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
30/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA v2 on form to prevent spam

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 simple domain-for-sale landing page with minimal content.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses provided.
  4. Uses Google reCAPTCHA v2 for spam protection on offer form.
  5. No HTTPS detected in provided URL; security headers unknown.
  6. No analytics or tracking scripts detected beyond Google reCAPTCHA.
  7. No social media or external business-related links present.
  8. WHOIS data indicates privacy protection, common for domain sales.
  9. Overall low trust and professionalism due to minimal content and lack of business info.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a standard front-end technology stack with Bootstrap, Font Awesome, Animate.css, Google Fonts, and jQuery. Google reCAPTCHA v2 is integrated for form spam protection. The site lacks HTTPS, which is a critical technical deficiency. Performance is moderate with asynchronous loading of scripts. Mobile optimization and accessibility are basic but functional. No CMS or hosting provider information is detected. The site is a simple static landing page with minimal technical complexity.
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 no-one.nl. 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 no-one.nl.

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.