Skip to main content

Security report for philandcompany.com

ExpiredDomains.com · Technology · N/a

High risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 3 other checks.

Security score

40/100

Risk levelHigh

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

ExpiredDomains.com operates as a specialized platform aggregating expired and expiring domain names, providing users with advanced search and filtering tools, domain metrics, and real-time data. The platform targets domain investors, SEOs, marketers, and businesses seeking valuable domain assets. It holds a strong market position as a leading expired domain marketplace aggregator, leveraging partnerships with registrars like GoDaddy to facilitate domain purchases. Technically, the website employs modern web standards with a custom-built interface, SVG icons, and JavaScript enhancements. The site is mobile-optimized and offers a good user experience with clear navigation and relevant content. Security-wise, the platform uses HTTPS and CSRF tokens for form protection and implements cookie consent mechanisms, but lacks published security policies or advanced security headers. No critical vulnerabilities or blocking mechanisms were detected, indicating a stable security posture. Overall, the website is professional, trustworthy, and compliant with basic privacy regulations, though there is room for improvement in formal security disclosures and accessibility.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
43/ 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. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

    • 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

  2. 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

  3. 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 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';…

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

Keep watching philandcompany.com

This scan found 16 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
55
Email security
35
DNS health
85
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
43
Average
40

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 model centers on providing a free-to-use platform for discovering expired domains, monetized through referrals to domain registrars such as GoDaddy. The platform's competitive advantage lies in its comprehensive domain listings, exclusive data metrics, and user-friendly interface. Its target customers include domain investors, affiliate marketers, and SEO professionals. The presence of numerous positive user testimonials and a high rating indicates strong customer satisfaction and market traction. The partnership with GoDaddy enhances credibility and expands service offerings. Growth indicators include daily updated listings and a large user base. The company maintains active social media channels to engage its community and promote its services.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and CSRF protection on forms. Cookie consent is implemented to comply with privacy regulations. However, the absence of explicit security policies, incident response information, and security.txt files indicates gaps in formal security governance. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected, and no WAF or blocking mechanisms interfere with access. The platform would benefit from implementing security headers such as Content Security Policy and HSTS to enhance protection. Overall, the security posture is adequate for the business type but could be strengthened to meet higher compliance standards.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive security policy and incident response plan accessible on the website.
  2. Implement and configure security headers including CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Add a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.
  4. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all visitors.
  5. Regularly audit SSL/TLS configuration to ensure adherence to modern security standards.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
ExpiredDomains.com
Description
ExpiredDomains.com is a platform that aggregates and lists expired and expiring domain names for sale, providing advanced tools and real-time data to help users find valuable domains.
Key services
Expired domain listings, Domain search and filtering tools, Domain metrics and SEO insights, Referral to domain registrars (e.g., GoDaddy)
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, SVG icons, CookieConsent.js
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of CSRF tokens in forms
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented
  • HTTPS enforced (implied by canonical URLs and external links)

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Meta Pixel (Facebook Pixel)
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Meta Pixel (Facebook Pixel)
Marketing tools
Cookie consent with statistics tracking, Social media marketing
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is a domain marketplace aggregator focused on expired domains
  2. Content is rich with domain data, user testimonials, and FAQs
  3. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found, only contact form
  4. Cookie consent and privacy policy are implemented
  5. No explicit security policy or incident response info published
  6. Use of external trusted domains like GoDaddy and major social media platforms
  7. No signs of blocking or WAF challenges
  8. SEO and marketing tools are integrated
  9. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerabilities detected
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a custom-built front end with HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript, including SVG icons and lazy loading techniques for images and videos. It integrates third-party analytics such as Google Analytics and Facebook Pixel for tracking and marketing purposes. The site is mobile responsive and provides a clean, well-structured user interface. Performance is moderate with some lazy loading optimizations. No CMS or major frameworks were detected, suggesting a bespoke solution. Hosting provider details are not explicit. The technical implementation is solid but could benefit from enhanced security headers and accessibility improvements.
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 philandcompany.com. 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 philandcompany.com.

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.