Skip to main content

Security report for noololly.studio

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

59/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website 'noololly.studio' is a personal portfolio site primarily showcasing a software project named 'Uno'. The site is minimalistic and informal, targeting a general audience likely familiar with the site owner. The business model is non-commercial, focusing on personal project display rather than a formal business offering. The domain registration data is inconsistent, showing a future creation date which undermines trust and raises questions about data accuracy or legitimacy. Technically, the site uses basic HTML, CSS, and minimal JavaScript with no detected CMS or advanced frameworks. Hosting appears to be via Name.com based on WHOIS data. Security posture is weak with no security headers, no DNSSEC, and no privacy or cookie policies. No contact information or incident response details are provided, limiting trust and compliance. Overall, the site is low risk but lacks professional security and privacy practices.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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

9 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 noololly.studio

This scan found 27 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. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

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
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
59

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 site represents an individual developer or hobbyist rather than a commercial entity. There is no clear market positioning or revenue model. The key service is software development showcased through the Uno project. The target audience is likely peers or collaborators in software development communities. The site links to social media platforms including GitHub, Bluesky, Mastodon, and LinkedIn, indicating some community engagement. There are no partnerships or subsidiaries identified. The lack of business information and policies suggests a non-commercial, personal use case.

Security posture

Security maturity is low. The absence of HTTPS enforcement details, security headers, and DNSSEC reduces domain and site security. No privacy or cookie policies indicate non-compliance with GDPR or similar regulations. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are present. The suspicious WHOIS data further reduces trustworthiness. No analytics or tracking scripts reduce privacy concerns but also limit business insights. Overall, the site is low risk but would benefit from basic security and compliance improvements.

Recommendations

  1. Correct or verify domain WHOIS registration data to ensure legitimacy and trust.
  2. Enable DNSSEC and implement security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Add HTTPS enforcement and verify SSL configuration for secure communications.
  4. Publish privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  5. Add clear contact information and incident response details to enhance transparency and security readiness.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Personal website showcasing a project called 'Uno' developed by the site owner. The site is informal and appears to be a personal or portfolio site rather than a commercial business.
Key services
Uno project software development
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
40/100

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 portfolio with minimal content.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers provided.
  4. Social media links to Bluesky, Mastodon, LinkedIn, and GitHub are present.
  5. No forms or data collection mechanisms detected.
  6. No security headers or advanced security features detected.
  7. No analytics or tracking scripts detected except a webring embed script.
  8. Domain WHOIS data contains a future creation date, which is suspicious.
  9. No advertising or marketing tools detected.
  10. Website design is basic with a dark theme and simple layout.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with basic HTML and CSS, with minimal JavaScript limited to a webring embed script. No CMS or advanced frameworks detected. Hosting is likely via Name.com based on registrar and name servers. The site design is simple and not fully optimized for mobile or accessibility. SEO optimization is minimal with no meta tags or structured data present. Performance is expected to be moderate given the simplicity. There is no evidence of analytics or tracking tools. Technical debt is low due to simplicity but modernization opportunities exist to improve security, privacy, and user experience.
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 noololly.studio. 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 noololly.studio.

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.