Skip to main content

Security report for pixel-shot.com

Pixel-Shot Studio (Africa Studio) · Media · N/a

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

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Pixel-Shot Studio operates as a stock photography agency providing a wide range of high-quality stock images and related services such as custom shooting and photo retouching. The website positions itself as one of the largest creators of stock content, targeting photographers, creative professionals, and buyers of stock photos. The business model is direct sales of digital content with user account management features including login, registration, and password recovery. Technically, the website uses a traditional web stack with jQuery and jQuery UI for UI components, and integrates Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager for user tracking and analytics. The site is hosted under a domain registered with Internet Invest, Ltd. dba Imena.ua, with a domain age consistent with the business history. The website shows moderate performance and basic mobile optimization. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS (implied by external Google Analytics scripts loaded over HTTPS), but lacks DNSSEC and explicit HTTP security headers. The domain is protected against unauthorized transfer. No privacy or cookie policies are present, which is a compliance gap. Forms have client-side validation but no visible advanced security measures. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided. Overall, the website is functional and professional with moderate trustworthiness. Key risks include lack of privacy and cookie policies, absence of security headers, and missing DNSSEC. Strategic improvements in these areas would enhance compliance and security posture.

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 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';…

  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

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

Keep watching pixel-shot.com

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
77
Security headers
15
Email security
55
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
60

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

Pixel-Shot Studio targets the media sector, specifically stock photography. It operates a direct-to-customer sales model with additional services like custom shoots and retouching. The company appears medium-sized with a domain founded in 2018. The website content and structure indicate a focus on professional photographers and creative buyers. The presence of multiple language options suggests an international audience. The business leverages Google Analytics for insights but lacks advanced marketing or affiliate programs. No partnerships or subsidiaries are identified from the data. The company maintains a professional online presence with clear terms of service and contact email but lacks comprehensive privacy and security disclosures.

Security posture

The security maturity level is moderate. The domain is protected with clientTransferProhibited status, reducing risk of hijacking. However, the absence of DNSSEC and HTTP security headers weakens DNS and transport security. The site uses HTTPS but SSL configuration details are unknown. Forms include client-side validation but no evidence of advanced protections like CAPTCHA or multi-factor authentication. No security policy, incident response, or vulnerability disclosure information is published, limiting transparency. The use of third-party analytics introduces moderate user tracking. Overall, the site is functional but would benefit from enhanced security controls and compliance documentation.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement standard HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy with GDPR compliance details.
  4. Add a security policy page including incident response and vulnerability disclosure contacts.
  5. Review and enhance form security with server-side validation and anti-automation measures.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Pixel-Shot Studio (Africa Studio)
Description
Pixel-Shot is one of the largest creators of high-quality stock content. Here you can purchase our photos directly from us at the best prices.
Key services
Stock photos, Custom shooting, Photo retouching
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery 3.4.1, jQuery UI, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
50/100
Good practices seen
  • Domain status clientTransferProhibited to prevent unauthorized transfer
  • Login and registration forms with client-side validation

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a stock photography agency offering direct sales and related services.
  2. Content is well organized with multiple categories and search/filter features.
  3. No privacy or cookie policy found, which is a compliance gap.
  4. Login, registration, and password recovery forms are present with client-side validation.
  5. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found.
  6. No phone numbers or physical addresses found; only email contact available.
  7. Use of Google Analytics and Tag Manager indicates moderate user tracking.
  8. No explicit security headers or DNSSEC enabled, which could be improved.
  9. Domain registrar is reputable and domain status protects against unauthorized transfer.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a classic jQuery-based frontend with jQuery UI components for UI elements like autocomplete and sliders. Google Analytics and Tag Manager are integrated for tracking. The site is hosted on a domain registered with a reputable registrar but lacks DNSSEC. Performance is moderate with no explicit optimization indicators. Mobile optimization is basic, with some responsive design elements. SEO is basic with meta description and title tags but no structured data or Open Graph tags detected. Accessibility features are minimal but present through ARIA roles in UI components. The technical stack is stable but could be modernized with newer frameworks and enhanced security configurations.
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 pixel-shot.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 pixel-shot.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.