Skip to main content

Security report for pixelgallery.pro

Pixel Gallery · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

71/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Pixel Gallery is a small technology company specializing in a WordPress gallery addon plugin designed for the Elementor page builder. The website presents a professional and modern interface targeting WordPress developers and designers seeking easy-to-use gallery solutions. The business model revolves around software addon sales and support within the WordPress ecosystem. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with Elementor and uses modern JavaScript libraries such as Swiper.js and jQuery. It integrates marketing and analytics tools including Facebook Pixel and Google Tag Manager, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enforced but lacks advanced security headers and explicit privacy or cookie policies, which are areas for improvement. Overall, the site appears legitimate and trustworthy but would benefit from enhanced privacy compliance and clearer contact information to improve business credibility and user trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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

5 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 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 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

  3. 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 pixelgallery.pro

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
65
Security headers
65
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
71

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention pixelgallery.pro, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for pixelgallery.pro right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

Monitor on Breach (opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Pixel Gallery occupies a niche market within the WordPress plugin ecosystem, focusing on Elementor users who require advanced gallery functionality. Its competitive advantage lies in being the first Elementor-based gallery addon with drag-and-drop ease. The business likely generates revenue through plugin sales and possibly premium addons or support services. The target customers are web developers, designers, and agencies using WordPress and Elementor. The presence of structured data and SEO optimization suggests an intent to capture organic search traffic. The company appears small with no public parent or subsidiary affiliations. The lack of public WHOIS data is typical for small software vendors protecting privacy. The marketing ecosystem includes Facebook and Google analytics tools, supporting growth and user engagement tracking.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS, which is mandatory and a strong security baseline. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options reduces the overall security posture. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. The site lacks visible privacy and cookie policies, which is a compliance gap under GDPR and other privacy regulations. Incident response and security policy information are not publicly available, limiting transparency. The use of third-party tracking pixels introduces privacy considerations. Overall, the security maturity is moderate but could be significantly improved by implementing recommended headers, privacy compliance, and incident response disclosures.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with user consent mechanisms to ensure GDPR compliance.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Publish clear contact information including support and security incident response contacts to improve trust and compliance.
  4. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking pixels to minimize privacy risks and ensure transparency.
  5. Consider adding a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible security reporting.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Pixel Gallery
Description
Pixel Gallery is the first Elementor based WordPress gallery addon that provides the easiest image gallery making experience. Just drag and drop gallery widgets
Key services
WordPress gallery addon for Elementor, Drag and drop gallery widgets
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Elementor, Swiper.js, jQuery, Facebook Pixel, Google Tag Manager, Rank Math SEO
Frameworks
Elementor
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager)
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel
Marketing tools
Rank Math SEO
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a WordPress-based product site for a gallery addon plugin
  2. No public WHOIS data available due to TLD not supported and privacy
  3. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service pages found in HTML
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the content
  5. Uses modern web technologies and SEO best practices
  6. Includes Facebook Pixel and Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing
  7. No security headers detected in provided data
  8. No signs of malware or phishing
  9. No adult or questionable content detected
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS using the Elementor page builder framework, leveraging modern JavaScript libraries like Swiper.js for UI components. It uses Rank Math SEO plugin for search engine optimization and integrates Google Tag Manager and Facebook Pixel for analytics and marketing. The site loads multiple CSS and JS assets from its own domain and trusted third-party sources. Performance is moderate with responsive design and mobile optimization evident. Accessibility features are basic but present. The site lacks advanced security headers and privacy compliance features. Hosting provider details are not discernible from the HTML content. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern and suitable for a small software product website but could benefit from enhanced security and privacy technical controls.
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 pixelgallery.pro. 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 pixelgallery.pro.

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.