Skip to main content

Security report for roxie.nyc

Other · United States

High risk. 9 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

49/100

Risk levelHigh

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

The website roxie.nyc serves as a personal portfolio and creative showcase for an individual named Roxie Mika. It features links to social media profiles, galleries for original characters and photography, and a minimalistic design focused on personal branding. The site is hosted on DigitalOcean and uses HTTPS, indicating a basic but secure technical infrastructure. However, it lacks common compliance and security features such as privacy policies, cookie consent mechanisms, and security headers. No contact information or business details are provided, which limits its business credibility and user trust. The content is safe for general audiences and does not contain any adult or explicit material.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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

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 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 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

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

Keep watching roxie.nyc

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. 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
52
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
75
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
50
Average
49

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

Roxie.nyc operates as a small-scale personal portfolio site targeting a general audience interested in digital art, photography, and creative content. The business model is centered on personal branding and showcasing creative works rather than commercial transactions. The site maintains a niche position with no evident partnerships or subsidiaries. The absence of business contact details and formal policies suggests a low level of commercial activity. The domain age of 2014 supports a mature presence, but the lack of advanced features indicates limited growth or monetization efforts.

Security posture

The security posture of roxie.nyc is basic. HTTPS is enabled, and domain transfer protections are in place, which are positive indicators. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options reduces the overall security robustness. No forms or data collection points are present, minimizing attack surface but also limiting user engagement. The site does not demonstrate compliance with GDPR or other privacy regulations due to missing policies and consent mechanisms. Incident response and vulnerability disclosure information are also absent, indicating low security maturity.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement standard security headers (CSP, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to protect against common web attacks.
  3. Add a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie consent mechanism to improve compliance with GDPR and other regulations.
  4. Provide clear contact information and establish an incident response contact channel to improve trust and security readiness.
  5. Improve mobile optimization and accessibility to enhance user experience and broaden audience reach.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Personal or portfolio website for Roxie Mika featuring links to social profiles and galleries.
Key services
Online portfolio, Photography gallery, Original character (OC) gallery, Social media presence
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS, JavaScript
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
55/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Domain status clientTransferProhibited and clientDeleteProhibited

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a personal portfolio site with minimal business information.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers provided.
  4. No forms or data collection mechanisms detected.
  5. Site uses HTTPS and is hosted on DigitalOcean.
  6. No security headers detected in HTML content.
  7. No analytics or tracking scripts detected.
  8. Content is safe and suitable for general audiences.
  9. No advertising or marketing tools detected.
  10. Site navigation is simple with links to social and gallery pages.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using standard HTML5, CSS, and JavaScript without any detected frameworks or CMS platforms. Hosting is provided by DigitalOcean, a reputable cloud provider. The site loads moderate content including SVG graphics and audio elements, with basic mobile responsiveness. No analytics or tracking scripts are present, indicating minimal data collection. The absence of modern frameworks or CMS suggests a static or hand-coded site, which reduces complexity but may limit scalability. Performance is moderate with no evident optimization techniques. Accessibility features are minimal but present, and SEO optimization is basic with meta viewport and charset tags included.
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 roxie.nyc. 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 roxie.nyc.

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.