Skip to main content

Security report for porninspector.com

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

64/100

Risk levelMedium

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

PornInspector.com is an adult content review website specializing in providing detailed and impartial reviews of pornographic websites, including sample videos, galleries, and user opinions. The site targets an adult audience seeking trustworthy guidance in the chaotic online erotica market. It operates primarily as a content review and affiliate referral platform, offering discounts and curated recommendations. Technically, the site uses standard web technologies including Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, AddThis social sharing, and Twitter widgets. The site is accessible, loads quickly, and has a basic mobile optimization level. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS enabled but lacks important security headers and explicit incident response or security policies. Privacy compliance is minimal with a basic privacy policy but no cookie consent mechanism or GDPR indicators. Business credibility is limited by the absence of WHOIS registration data and lack of visible contact information, which reduces trustworthiness despite professional content presentation.

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

6 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 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 porninspector.com

This scan found 25 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
72
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
64

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 website occupies a niche position in the adult entertainment industry as a porn site review aggregator and guide. Its competitive advantage lies in extensive reviews with multimedia samples and user-generated opinions. The business model appears to be affiliate marketing and advertising, targeting adult consumers interested in pornographic content. The site shows signs of active content updates and community engagement through forums and polls. However, the lack of transparent business information and contact details limits its credibility. There is no evidence of partnerships or subsidiaries. The site’s marketing ecosystem includes social media presence on Twitter and use of common tracking and sharing tools.

Security posture

The security maturity of PornInspector.com is moderate. HTTPS is properly implemented, ensuring encrypted communications. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options exposes the site to potential clickjacking, MIME sniffing, and other web-based attacks. No visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The site lacks published security policies, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms, indicating limited preparedness for security incidents. Privacy compliance is minimal, with no cookie consent or GDPR compliance indicators, which could pose regulatory risks. Overall, the site would benefit from enhanced security controls and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to mitigate common web attacks.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner and detailed cookie policy to improve privacy compliance and user trust.
  3. Publish clear terms of service and a dedicated security policy page outlining incident response procedures and contact information.
  4. Provide verified business contact information including emails and phone numbers to enhance credibility and user confidence.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and dependencies to ensure no vulnerable libraries are in use and maintain up-to-date security posture.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
The impartial porn site reviewers explores the chaotic world of online erotica and brings you porn reviews to the most popular, original, and stimulating sites on the web. Our goal is to provide you with the best possible online adult experience.
Key services
Porn site reviews, Sample videos and galleries, Discount offers for pay sites, User opinions and ratings, Newsletter subscription
Content quality
good
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, AddThis social sharing, Twitter widgets, Custom CSS and JavaScript
Performance
fast
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No visible vulnerable libraries

Analytics and tracking

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

Advertising

Marketing tools
AddThis social sharing
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a niche adult content review platform with extensive porn site reviews and multimedia samples.
  2. No WHOIS registration data available, raising legitimacy questions.
  3. No visible contact emails or phone numbers for business or support.
  4. Privacy policy page exists but cookie policy and terms of service are missing or minimal.
  5. Uses standard tracking and social sharing scripts (Google Analytics, AddThis, Twitter).
  6. No WAF or blocking detected; site content fully accessible.
  7. Security headers are missing; HTTPS is enabled.
  8. No explicit security or incident response policies published.
  9. Content is clearly adult and NSFW, targeting adults only.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a custom-built front-end with static HTML, CSS, and JavaScript, supplemented by third-party services such as Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, AddThis, and Twitter widgets. The site loads quickly and is structured with clear navigation and categorized content. Mobile optimization is basic but functional. No CMS or major frameworks were detected, suggesting a lightweight and possibly manually maintained site. The absence of security headers and cookie consent mechanisms indicates technical debt in security and privacy compliance. Hosting provider details are not discernible from the content. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports the business needs but requires modernization in security and privacy features.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 63/100Medium34 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with porninspector.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 porninspector.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.