Skip to main content

Security report for orangedao.xyz

Orange DAO · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

67/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Orange DAO is a niche community platform targeting crypto founders, aiming to provide a collaborative environment for networking and growth within the blockchain space. The website is built using the Framer platform and integrates Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager for user tracking. While the design is modern and mobile-optimized, the site lacks critical compliance elements such as privacy and cookie policies, terms of service, and contact information, which are essential for trust and regulatory adherence. Security posture is minimal with no detected security headers or incident response contacts, indicating room for improvement in protecting user data and ensuring compliance. Overall, the site presents a basic but functional presence in the crypto community sector, with moderate risk due to transparency and compliance gaps.

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

8 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"

    • 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';…

  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 orangedao.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
57
Security headers
40
Email security
85
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
67

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 positions itself as a specialized community for crypto founders, likely monetizing through membership or community services. The target audience is clearly crypto entrepreneurs and enthusiasts. The use of privacy protection in WHOIS is typical for crypto projects but reduces transparency. The lack of detailed business information, certifications, or contact details limits the ability to fully assess credibility. The site relies on modern front-end technology but lacks deeper integrations or partner disclosures. Growth potential depends on community engagement and trust-building through enhanced transparency and compliance.

Security posture

The current security maturity is low, with no visible security headers or policies. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates non-compliance with GDPR and other privacy regulations. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are present, which could delay response to security incidents. The use of HTTPS is assumed but not confirmed from provided data. The site uses Google Analytics, which requires proper consent mechanisms that are missing. Overall, the security posture exposes the business to regulatory and reputational risks.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance.
  2. Add contact information including support and security incident contacts.
  3. Deploy security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Establish a vulnerability disclosure policy and publish a security.txt file.
  5. Enhance transparency by reducing WHOIS privacy protection or providing verified business details.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Orange DAO
Description
Join The Best Founder Community In Crypto
Key services
founder community engagement, networking in crypto space
Content quality
basic
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Framer
Frameworks
Framer
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
basic
Navigation
basic
Professionalism
basic
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website is a crypto founder community platform with basic content and limited business information.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found, indicating compliance gaps.
  3. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses found on the site.
  4. Uses modern front-end framework Framer and Google Analytics for tracking.
  5. No security headers or explicit security policies detected.
  6. No forms detected for data collection on the main page.
  7. No social media links or company contact details present.
  8. Domain WHOIS is privacy protected, common in crypto but reduces transparency.
  9. No signs of adult or NSFW content; content is safe for general audiences.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the Framer platform, leveraging modern web fonts and Google Analytics for tracking. The technical implementation is clean but basic, with no advanced CMS or backend detected. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization. SEO is basic with meta tags and Open Graph data present but no structured JSON-LD schema detected. The site lacks accessibility features beyond basic compliance. Hosting appears to be via Framer's infrastructure. Technical risks include missing security headers and lack of compliance mechanisms which could impact user trust and regulatory standing.
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 orangedao.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 orangedao.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.