Skip to main content

Security report for piefed.zip

Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

75/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Piefed.zip is a federated social platform focusing on technology and gaming communities, providing a space for users to explore topics and discuss various subjects. It operates as a sister site to Lemmy.zip, sharing the same team and infrastructure. The platform offers community-driven content with posts, images, and links to external news and media sources, targeting a general audience interested in tech and gaming. The business model centers around federated social networking, leveraging modern web technologies for a responsive and accessible user experience. Technically, the site uses Bootstrap and HTMX frameworks, with images hosted on Backblaze B2, indicating a modern but modest infrastructure. Security posture is decent with HTTPS and CSRF protections, though explicit security headers and policies are lacking. Privacy and cookie policies are not found, and no direct contact or business information is disclosed, which impacts trust and compliance scores. Overall, the site is functional and content-rich but would benefit from enhanced transparency and security disclosures.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
58/ 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

3 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.

    • 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

  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.

    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching piefed.zip

This scan found 18 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
75
Security headers
70
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
58
Average
75

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 platform positions itself as a niche federated social network with a focus on tech and gaming, appealing to enthusiasts and community members. Its competitive advantage lies in its federated nature and association with Lemmy.zip, suggesting a shared ecosystem and user base. Revenue streams are not evident from the content, implying a possible non-commercial or community-supported model. The target customers are tech-savvy users and gamers seeking discussion forums. Growth indicators include active posting and cross-posting features, with partnerships implied through sister site relationships. Strategic observations highlight the need for improved compliance and trust signals to enhance market credibility.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and CSRF tokens implemented, reducing common web attack vectors. However, the absence of comprehensive security headers like Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options limits protection against advanced threats. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. Compliance gaps exist due to missing privacy and cookie policies, which are critical under GDPR and similar regulations. Incident response readiness and security culture indicators are not visible, suggesting areas for improvement. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a community platform but requires enhancements to meet higher compliance and security standards.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy with consent mechanisms.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to strengthen security posture.
  3. Provide clear contact information including business details and incident response contacts to improve trust and compliance.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and dependencies to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Develop and communicate a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to engage with security researchers.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Piefed.zip is a general Piefed server, with a focus on tech and gaming. We're the sister site of Lemmy.zip, and run by the same team.
Key services
Community discussions, Content sharing, Federated social networking
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap, HTMX, JavaScript, Web Fonts (Inter), Backblaze B2 (image hosting)
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • CSRF token present
  • Use of secure cookies (implied by CSRF token usage)
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

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 federated social platform focused on tech and gaming communities.
  2. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the main page.
  3. No direct contact information or business details disclosed.
  4. Content is user-generated posts with images and links to external news and media sites.
  5. Site uses modern frontend technologies and is mobile optimized.
  6. No advertising or tracking scripts detected in the provided HTML.
  7. Security headers are minimal but HTTPS and CSRF tokens are present.
  8. No signs of adult or explicit content.
  9. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern frontend stack including Bootstrap for responsive design and HTMX for dynamic content loading, enhancing user experience and performance. Images are hosted on Backblaze B2, indicating use of cloud storage for media assets. The site is mobile optimized and accessible with skip links and ARIA labels. SEO is basic with meta tags and Open Graph images but lacks structured data like JSON-LD. Performance is moderate with preload hints and font optimization. No CMS is explicitly detected, suggesting a custom or federated platform backend. Technical risks include lack of advanced security headers and missing compliance-related pages, which could affect operational resilience and regulatory adherence.
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 piefed.zip. 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 piefed.zip.

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.