Skip to main content

Security report for shields.io

Registrant of shields.io · Technology · United Kingdom

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

Shields.io is a well-established open source project founded in 2013, providing concise, consistent, and legible badges primarily for software projects and developers. The website serves as a hub for dynamic and static badge generation, an NPM library for badge rendering, and options for self-hosting via Docker. Its market position is strong within the developer community, supported by active GitHub repositories, community channels like Discord, and transparent funding via Open Collective. The business model is community and donation-driven, targeting developers and open source projects globally. Technically, the website is built using modern web technologies including React and Docusaurus, ensuring excellent design quality, mobile optimization, and accessibility. Hosting and DNS services are managed via Cloudflare, providing robust performance and security. The site is SEO optimized with proper meta tags and structured navigation, contributing to a positive user experience. From a security perspective, Shields.io enforces HTTPS and has domain transfer protections in place. However, it lacks DNSSEC, security headers, and published security or incident response policies, which are areas for improvement. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. Privacy compliance is partial, with a basic privacy policy present but no cookie consent or terms of service pages. Contact information is minimal, with no direct emails or phone numbers listed. Overall, Shields.io presents a low-risk profile with a high trustworthiness rating due to its transparency, domain age, and community presence. Strategic recommendations include enhancing privacy compliance with cookie consent, publishing security policies, enabling DNSSEC, and adding security headers to improve the security posture and user trust.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of shields.io. View the latest report

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 shields.io

This scan found 24 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
75
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
70
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

Shields.io operates in the technology sector as an important entity providing developer tools focused on badge generation. Its competitive advantage lies in its extensive service coverage, open source nature, and strong community engagement. The business model relies on open source contributions and donations, targeting developers and software projects worldwide. Growth is supported by active GitHub development, community channels, and transparent funding mechanisms. The ecosystem includes partnerships with platforms like GitHub, Open Collective, and Discord, enhancing collaboration and visibility. The company maintains a small size with a focused product offering and consistent branding, positioning it as a trusted service in the developer tools market.

Security posture

The security maturity of Shields.io is moderate to good. HTTPS is enforced, and domain registration protections are in place, but the absence of DNSSEC and security headers reduces the overall security posture. No published security or incident response policies limit transparency and preparedness for incidents. Privacy compliance is basic, lacking cookie consent mechanisms and terms of service. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found, indicating sound operational security. The project would benefit from formalizing security policies, enabling DNSSEC, and implementing security headers to mitigate risks and enhance trust.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC to improve domain security and prevent DNS spoofing.
  2. Implement security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options to protect against common web attacks.
  3. Publish a comprehensive security policy and incident response plan to increase transparency and preparedness.
  4. Add a cookie consent mechanism and a dedicated cookie policy page to improve privacy compliance.
  5. Create and publish terms of service to clarify user rights and responsibilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Registrant of shields.io
Description
Concise, consistent, and legible badges
Key services
Dynamic badges for hundreds of services, Static badge creation, Badge-Maker NPM library, Self-hosting via Docker image
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, React, Docusaurus
Frameworks
Docusaurus v3.8.1
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Domain status clientTransferProhibited

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
excellent
User experience
excellent
Content relevance
excellent
Navigation
excellent
Professionalism
excellent
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is focused on providing badges for software projects.
  3. Strong community and open source presence via GitHub and Discord.
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly listed on main pages.
  5. No cookie consent or terms of service pages found.
  6. Privacy policy is present but basic.
  7. No explicit security or incident response policies published.
  8. Modern tech stack with Docusaurus and React.
  9. Good SEO and accessibility practices observed.
  10. No advertising or tracking scripts detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern technology stack featuring React and Docusaurus, ensuring a responsive and accessible user interface. Hosting is managed via Cloudflare, providing reliable DNS and CDN services that contribute to fast loading times and good performance. The site includes proper meta tags for SEO and supports mobile devices well. No technical debt or deprecated technologies were detected. Opportunities exist to enhance security through additional HTTP headers and DNSSEC. Overall, the technical infrastructure is robust and well-maintained, supporting the business goals effectively.
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. 64/100Medium32 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with shields.io. 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 shields.io.

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.