Skip to main content

Security report for opn.haus

Open House* · Media · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

53/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Open House* is a small independent music label and community platform specializing in niche electronic and IDM-pop genres. The website showcases music releases from artists such as mem4, Garden Busker, and MinimusNoah, and provides a forum for community interaction. The business model revolves around digital music distribution via Bandcamp and SoundCloud, combined with community engagement through an online forum. The label targets music enthusiasts and independent artists interested in experimental sounds. Technically, the website is built with basic HTML and CSS, utilizing Open Graph and Twitter Card metadata for social media integration. The site lacks advanced frameworks or CMS platforms and shows moderate performance and basic mobile optimization. SEO and accessibility features are minimal but functional. No analytics or tracking scripts were detected, indicating a privacy-conscious approach. From a security perspective, the site lacks visible HTTPS confirmation and security headers, which lowers its security posture. No privacy or cookie policies are present, indicating compliance gaps with GDPR and other privacy regulations. WHOIS data is privacy-protected via Identity Digital Inc., which is common for small independent entities but reduces transparency. Overall, the site is safe for general audiences and free from adult or explicit content. The overall risk is moderate, with recommendations to improve HTTPS implementation, add security headers, and publish privacy and cookie policies to enhance compliance and trust. The business credibility is solid for a niche independent label, but technical and security improvements would strengthen its digital maturity and user trust.

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

7 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

      Unable to retrieve SSL certificate

      Could not establish secure connection to retrieve certificate information

      What to do: Check if the server is accessible and SSL/TLS is properly configured

  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 opn.haus

This scan found 19 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
70
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
53

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

Open House* operates as a niche independent music label focusing on electronic and IDM-pop genres. Its competitive advantage lies in its curated artist roster and community-driven approach via an online forum. Revenue streams likely include digital music sales and streaming via Bandcamp and SoundCloud. The target customers are music enthusiasts and independent artists seeking experimental and wonky music styles. Growth indicators include recent music releases and active forum engagement. The partnership ecosystem includes external artist sites and music platforms. The business operates with a lean structure, emphasizing digital distribution and community building.

Security posture

The website's security maturity is low to moderate. Key vulnerabilities include the absence of HTTPS confirmation and missing security headers, which expose users to potential risks such as man-in-the-middle attacks and clickjacking. The lack of privacy and cookie policies indicates non-compliance with GDPR and related regulations. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are present. Data protection practices appear minimal, with no visible analytics or tracking scripts reducing privacy risks but also limiting user insights. The security culture seems informal, typical of small independent entities, with room for improvement in formalizing security and privacy controls.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate and enforce secure connections site-wide.
  2. Add essential security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and inform users.
  4. Establish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  5. Enhance accessibility and SEO by adding ARIA roles, structured data, and mobile optimization.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Open House*
Description
Open House* is a music label and community platform focused on releasing and promoting 'wonky songs from all 'round'. It features artists such as mem4, Garden Busker, and MinimusNoah, offering music releases, remixes, and an online forum for community engagement.
Key services
Music releases, Artist promotion, Community forum, Creative Engines programs
Content quality
good
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS, Open Graph meta tags, Twitter Cards
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
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website is a niche independent music label with active community engagement.
  2. No privacy or cookie policies found, indicating compliance gaps.
  3. No security headers or HTTPS status available; security posture is weak.
  4. No forms detected on the main page; contact is via mailto links only.
  5. No analytics or tracking scripts detected, indicating minimal user tracking.
  6. Content is safe and suitable for general audiences.
  7. WHOIS data is privacy-protected, limiting domain transparency.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a simple technology stack based on HTML5 and CSS with Open Graph and Twitter Card metadata for social sharing. No advanced frameworks or CMS platforms are detected, indicating a lightweight and manually maintained site. Performance is moderate with no evident optimization for mobile devices beyond basic responsiveness. The absence of analytics and tracking scripts suggests minimal data collection. Technical debt appears low but modernization opportunities exist in adopting HTTPS, security headers, and improved SEO and accessibility standards. Hosting provider details are not available from the data.
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 opn.haus. 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 opn.haus.

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.