Skip to main content

Security report for raccoongin.com

Raccoon Distillery · Other · N/a

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

Security score

63/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Raccoon Distillery is a niche brand focused on producing and marketing Raccoon Gin, a product that uniquely blends alcoholic beverage culture with the web3 and NFT communities. The website positions the brand as an iconic drink for web3 partying, targeting adult consumers engaged in blockchain and NFT ecosystems. The business model centers on e-commerce sales and community engagement through NFT and metaverse narratives. Technically, the website is built on the Webflow platform, leveraging modern web technologies and Google Tag Manager for analytics. The site is mobile optimized and presents a professional design with clear navigation. Security posture is moderate, with HTTPS enabled and cookie consent implemented, but lacks published security policies or incident response information. The absence of WHOIS data for the domain is a notable concern, impacting trust and legitimacy assessments. Overall, the site is functional and well-branded but would benefit from enhanced transparency and security disclosures.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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 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

  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 Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1
    • 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 raccoongin.com

This scan found 26 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
47
Security headers
30
Email security
65
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
63

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 company operates in a specialized market segment combining alcohol and web3 culture, which provides a competitive advantage by appealing to a growing niche audience. The brand leverages storytelling and NFT integration to differentiate itself. Revenue streams likely include direct gin sales via an online shop and community-driven marketing. The partnership ecosystem includes social media platforms and NFT-related projects, although no formal partner domains were identified. Growth indicators include active participation in web3 events and NFT Paris 2025. Strategic observations suggest opportunities to expand trust through improved domain registration transparency and enhanced security communications.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic to moderate security maturity level, with HTTPS enforced and cookie consent mechanisms in place. However, the lack of published security policies, incident response plans, and contact channels for security issues indicates gaps in security governance. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the content. Compliance with GDPR is only partially indicated through cookie consent and privacy policy presence but lacks detailed compliance statements. The absence of WHOIS data raises concerns about domain legitimacy and potential risks. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a small e-commerce site but requires improvements to meet higher standards.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive security policy and incident response plan accessible from the website footer.
  2. Provide clear contact information for security incidents, including abuse and security email addresses.
  3. Enhance privacy policy details to explicitly address GDPR compliance and data retention practices.
  4. Investigate and resolve the missing WHOIS data issue to improve domain legitimacy and trust.
  5. Implement accessibility improvements to meet WCAG standards and improve user experience for all visitors.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Raccoon Distillery
Description
Raccoon Distillery produces and markets Raccoon Gin, a unique gin brand associated with web3 culture and NFT communities. The brand story involves a narrative about saving the Metaverse and degens through their product. They also engage with NFT projects and web3 events.
Key services
Production and sale of Raccoon Gin, NFT related community engagement, Web3 event participation
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Webflow, Google Fonts, Google Tag Manager, Finsweet Cookie Consent
Platforms
Webflow
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Marketing tools
Finsweet Cookie Consent
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 a niche alcoholic beverage brand with web3 and NFT cultural integration.
  3. No direct company contact emails or phone numbers found on the main page.
  4. Privacy and cookie policies are present but basic in detail.
  5. No explicit security or incident response policies published.
  6. WHOIS data is missing, which is unusual and reduces domain trust.
  7. Social media presence includes Twitter, Discord, X (Twitter rebrand), and LinkedIn link to a designer.
  8. Website uses modern Webflow platform and includes Google Tag Manager for analytics.
  9. Age verification prompt indicates compliance with alcohol sale regulations.
  10. No forms detected on the main page for data collection.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the Webflow CMS platform, utilizing Google Fonts and Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing. The site loads moderate performance scripts and assets, with mobile optimization and responsive design implemented. No major technical debt or outdated libraries were detected. The use of Finsweet Cookie Consent indicates attention to privacy compliance. However, the site lacks structured data (JSON-LD) which could improve SEO and search engine trust. Hosting is via Webflow's CDN, providing reliable uptime and performance. Opportunities exist to enhance SEO, accessibility, and security headers to further strengthen the technical foundation.
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 raccoongin.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 raccoongin.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.