Skip to main content

Security report for shuttle.zip

Shuttle · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

55/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Shuttle is a technology company offering a file sharing and collaboration platform that emphasizes ease of use and branding customization. The website content is minimal but clearly targets users seeking simple and branded file collaboration solutions. The technical infrastructure leverages modern web technologies including React-based Remix framework, Tailwind CSS, and integrates multiple tracking and analytics services such as Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, and LinkedIn Insight Tag. Hosting and CDN services appear to be provided by Cloudflare, ensuring good performance and security. The security posture is solid with HTTPS enforced and nonce usage in scripts, but lacks explicit security headers and published security policies. Privacy compliance is weak due to absence of privacy and cookie policies or consent mechanisms. No contact information or business registration details are provided, which limits business credibility. Overall, the website is functional and moderately professional but requires improvements in privacy compliance and transparency to enhance trust and security.

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

6 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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.

    • Critical

      Unable to retrieve SSL certificate

      Could not establish secure connection to retrieve certificate information

      What to do: Check if the server is accessible and SSL/TLS is properly configured

  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

  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

    • 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 shuttle.zip

This scan found 20 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
0
Security headers
45
Email security
65
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
55

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

Shuttle operates in the technology sector, focusing on file sharing and collaboration services with a SaaS business model. The platform targets general users and businesses needing easy-to-use branded file collaboration tools. The company appears to be a small-sized entity with no public parent or subsidiary information. The market positioning is not explicitly stated but the service aims to differentiate by simplicity and branding features. The website integrates common marketing and tracking tools indicating an active digital marketing strategy. Lack of detailed business information and contact data suggests a startup or early-stage company. No certifications or trust badges are displayed, which could be improved to boost credibility.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses nonce attributes in scripts, indicating awareness of security best practices. However, it lacks explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options which are recommended to mitigate common web vulnerabilities. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is published, limiting transparency for security researchers and users. Tracking scripts are present but no cookie consent mechanism is implemented, which may pose GDPR compliance risks. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the analyzed content. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be significantly improved by adding security headers, privacy policies, and incident response details.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy with explicit consent mechanisms to improve GDPR compliance.
  2. Add standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance web security.
  3. Publish a security policy and vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file to improve transparency and incident response readiness.
  4. Provide clear contact information including security contact channels to facilitate communication and trust.
  5. Enhance website content quality and business information to improve credibility and user trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Shuttle
Description
Collaborate easy. Simply drag, drop and add your brand.
Key services
file sharing, collaboration, custom branding
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Tailwind CSS, React (implied by Remix framework usage), Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Cloudflare Insights
Frameworks
Remix
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of nonce attributes in scripts for CSP
  • Use of modern security-related scripts

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager, Cloudflare Insights, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag
Marketing tools
Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the analyzed page.
  2. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses found in the content.
  3. Website uses modern web technologies and tracking scripts but lacks explicit privacy compliance disclosures.
  4. No security or incident response policies published.
  5. Content is minimal and focused on file sharing collaboration with branding customization.
  6. No signs of adult or questionable content.
  7. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected; site content fully accessible.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern technology stack including the Remix React framework and Tailwind CSS for styling. It integrates multiple third-party analytics and marketing tools such as Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, and LinkedIn Insight Tag. Hosting appears to be via Cloudflare, providing CDN and security benefits. The site is mobile optimized and uses responsive design. Performance is moderate with some scaling transforms observed. Accessibility features are basic but present. No CMS was detected, indicating a custom or framework-based build. The site lacks some SEO optimization elements such as structured data or comprehensive meta tags beyond Open Graph and Twitter cards. Overall, the technical implementation is modern and functional but could benefit from enhanced SEO and accessibility improvements.
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 shuttle.zip. 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 shuttle.zip.

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.