Skip to main content

Security report for random-projects.net

Technology · Germany

Medium risk. 9 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

The website random-projects.net is a personal portfolio and blog site owned by an individual named Felix, a demoscener and coder from Germany. The site focuses on sharing coding projects, personal interests in software optimization, and hobby cooking recipes. It targets a general audience interested in technology and cooking, without commercial or enterprise positioning. The domain is well-established since 2013, indicating a stable online presence. Technically, the site uses basic modern web technologies including HTML5, CSS3, SVG graphics, and external font hosting from rsms.me. The site is moderately optimized for mobile devices and has a clear navigation structure, but lacks advanced SEO and accessibility features. There is no detected CMS or complex backend platform, suggesting a static or simple site architecture. From a security perspective, the site lacks critical security headers and privacy-related policies such as GDPR compliance, cookie consent, or incident response contacts. The domain registration is consistent and legitimate, but DNSSEC is not enabled, and no SSL/TLS details were provided to confirm HTTPS usage. No forms or data collection mechanisms are present, reducing attack surface but also limiting user interaction. Overall, the site is safe for general audiences with no adult or questionable content. The security posture is basic and could be improved by implementing HTTPS, security headers, and privacy policies. The business credibility is moderate given the personal nature of the site and lack of formal contact information. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security measures, adding privacy and cookie policies, and providing clear contact channels to improve trust and compliance.

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

9 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 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 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 random-projects.net

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
62
Security headers
25
Email security
60
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
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

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 random-projects.net, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for random-projects.net 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

The website serves as a personal platform for Felix, a coder and demoscener from Germany, sharing his projects and cooking recipes. It operates as a small-scale personal site without commercial intent or revenue streams. The target audience includes technology enthusiasts and hobby cooks. The site does not demonstrate partnerships, subsidiaries, or a broader business ecosystem. Its market position is niche and personal, with no direct competition or commercial market presence. Growth indicators are limited to content updates and social media presence. The business model is non-commercial, focused on personal branding and hobby sharing.

Security posture

The security maturity level of the website is low to moderate. There are no visible security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options, and no privacy or cookie policies are implemented, indicating compliance gaps with GDPR and other data protection regulations. The absence of forms reduces risk exposure but also limits incident response capabilities. The domain registration is stable and legitimate, but DNSSEC is not enabled, which could improve DNS security. No SSL/TLS configuration details were provided, so HTTPS status is unknown but recommended. Overall, the site lacks formal security policies and incident response readiness, which should be addressed to improve security culture and compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate to secure all communications.
  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 privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and inform users about data handling.
  4. Provide clear contact information and establish an incident response contact channel (e.g., security@ or abuse@ email).
  5. Enable DNSSEC for the domain to improve DNS integrity and security.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Personal website of Felix, a demoscener and coder from Germany, sharing interests in software optimization and hobby cooking with recipes.
Key services
sharing coding projects, sharing cooking recipes, personal blog
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, SVG, Google Fonts (Inter)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
40/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a personal portfolio and blog of an individual named Felix.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly provided.
  4. No forms or data collection mechanisms detected.
  5. External links point to legitimate social media and font hosting domains.
  6. No advertising or tracking technologies detected.
  7. Website content is safe and suitable for general audiences.
  8. WHOIS data shows domain is stable and consistent with website claims.
  9. No advanced security headers or policies detected.
  10. No evidence of CMS or complex backend technologies.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with standard HTML5 and CSS3 technologies, using SVG for graphics and external font hosting from rsms.me. There is no detected CMS or JavaScript frameworks, indicating a simple static site architecture. Performance is moderate with no heavy scripts or resources detected. Mobile optimization is good due to viewport meta tag and responsive CSS. SEO optimization is basic with minimal meta tags and no structured data or Open Graph tags. Accessibility features are minimal but present. The site could benefit from modernization by adding semantic HTML5 elements, ARIA roles, and enhanced SEO metadata.
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 random-projects.net. 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 random-projects.net.

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.