Skip to main content

Security report for qr.link

QR.io · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

59/100

Risk levelMedium

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

QR.io operates the qr.link domain as a service offering dynamic QR code generation and tracking solutions primarily targeted at businesses and marketers. The website content clearly explains the service and provides direct links to the parent company QR.io, which is the main brand behind the offering. The business model is SaaS-based, focusing on QR code creation and analytics. The domain is relatively young, created in 2018, which aligns with the modern technology service it provides. The site is professionally designed with good content quality and consistent branding. Technically, the website uses modern front-end libraries such as FontAwesome and PrismJS, and is hosted behind Cloudflare DNS, indicating a reliable infrastructure. The site is mobile optimized and SEO friendly, although accessibility features are basic. Performance is moderate with no major issues detected. However, some security best practices such as DNSSEC and security headers are not implemented, which could be improved. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and uses domain transfer protection, which are positive indicators. There is no evidence of exposed vulnerabilities or sensitive data leaks. Incident response contact is available via a support email. However, the absence of a formal security policy, vulnerability disclosure, and cookie consent mechanism are gaps in compliance and transparency. The site uses a tracking pixel from whos.amung.us but does not provide explicit cookie consent. Overall, the website presents a moderate risk profile with good business credibility and technical implementation but could improve privacy compliance and security posture. Strategic recommendations include enabling DNSSEC, adding security headers, implementing cookie consent, and publishing security policies to enhance trust and compliance.

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

8 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

  2. 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';…

  3. 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

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

Keep watching qr.link

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. 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
57
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
59

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

QR.io positions itself as a niche technology provider specializing in QR code solutions with a SaaS business model. Its competitive advantage lies in offering dynamic QR codes with tracking capabilities, appealing to businesses seeking marketing and engagement tools. The parent domain qr.io is the central brand, indicating a focused ecosystem. Revenue streams likely include subscription plans for QR code services. The target customers are businesses and marketers globally, although no specific country is indicated. The company appears small in size and relatively new, founded in 2018. Partnerships are limited but include social media presence on major platforms. The business operates with a clear digital presence and consistent branding, supporting growth potential in the QR code market.

Security posture

The security maturity level of the qr.link website is moderate. HTTPS is enforced, and domain transfer protection is enabled, which are foundational security measures. However, the lack of DNSSEC reduces DNS security. No security headers such as Content Security Policy or HSTS are detected, which are recommended to mitigate common web attacks. The site does not publish a dedicated security policy or vulnerability disclosure program, limiting transparency and incident response readiness. The presence of an abuse report email is positive but insufficient alone. Privacy compliance is partial, with a privacy policy present but no cookie consent mechanism despite tracking pixel usage. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a small technology service but requires improvements to meet higher compliance and security standards.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement standard security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to enhance web security.
  3. Add a cookie consent banner/mechanism to comply with privacy regulations and inform users about tracking.
  4. Publish a formal security policy and vulnerability disclosure program to improve transparency and incident response.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking pixels to ensure privacy compliance and minimize data exposure.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
QR.io
Description
qr.link is an example of a dynamic QR code service provided by QR.io that allows companies to create customized QR codes linking to websites, landing pages, or mobile app content with tracking capabilities.
Key services
Dynamic QR code generation, QR code tracking and analytics
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
FontAwesome 6.7.2, PrismJS, jQuery Vector Map (jqvmap), Cloudflare DNS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Domain status clientTransferProhibited

Analytics and tracking

Services
whos.amung.us
Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
whos.amung.us
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is focused on explaining the qr.link dynamic QR code service.
  3. Clear links to parent site QR.io and related policies.
  4. No phone numbers or physical addresses found on the site.
  5. No cookie consent mechanism detected despite tracking pixel usage.
  6. No explicit security policy or vulnerability disclosure page found.
  7. Use of modern front-end libraries and Cloudflare DNS.
  8. WHOIS data is consistent and domain is actively maintained.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern front-end technology stack including FontAwesome for icons, PrismJS for code highlighting, and jqvmap for vector maps, indicating a well-structured UI. Hosting and DNS are managed via Cloudflare, providing performance and security benefits. The site is mobile optimized and SEO friendly with appropriate meta tags and Open Graph data. However, no CMS or backend framework is detected, suggesting a static or custom-built site. Performance is moderate with no major issues but could benefit from further optimization. Accessibility is basic and could be improved to meet wider standards. The absence of security headers and DNSSEC are technical risks that should be addressed to strengthen the infrastructure.
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 qr.link. 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 qr.link.

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.