Skip to main content

Security report for sitescorechecker.com

Site Score Checker · Technology

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Email security and 1 other check.

Security score

77/100

Risk levelLow

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

Site Score Checker is a small technology-focused business providing free online SEO and website analysis tools. The website offers a broad range of services including SEO audits, PageSpeed insights, backlink analysis, and various other SEO-related utilities. It targets webmasters, digital marketers, SEO professionals, and business owners seeking to improve their online presence. The business operates primarily through a web platform with a mobile-responsive design and offers a Chrome extension for instant page analysis. Technically, the site uses modern web technologies such as Bootstrap, Font Awesome, Google Fonts, and integrates Google Adsense and Google Analytics for monetization and analytics. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS enabled and secure form submissions, but lacks advanced security headers and explicit security policies. Privacy compliance is weak due to the absence of privacy and cookie policies. Overall, the site is legitimate and consistent with its business claims, but could improve transparency and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

NIS2 outside view
60/ 100 · Medium
GDPR outside view
74/ 100 · Medium
Checks completed
9of 9

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

The NIS2 figure counts only evidence anyone can see from the internet. 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

3 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • High

      Tracking cookies set before consent

      Observed on the first page load as a new visitor, before any consent choice; Guard does not click the banner. A consent mechanism is present (Google Funding Choices, IAB TCF), but these analytics or marketing cookies were already set: Google Analytics (_ga_KYTMHVRD9R, _ga).

      What to do: Configure the consent platform to block these tags until the visitor accepts the matching category.

  2. 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.

    • High

      No DMARC record found

      There is no DMARC record at _dmarc.sitescorechecker.com, so receivers have no instruction for mail that fails SPF and DKIM.

      What to do: Publish a TXT record at _dmarc.sitescorechecker.com, starting with "v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@sitescorechecker.com" and moving to p=quarantine or p=reject once reports look clean.

  3. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • High

      High-Risk Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL, MySQL (unauthorized)) is reachable from the internet. The database accepts connections from the whole internet; only its password stands in the way.

      What to do: Block port 3306 at the firewall and reach MySQL through a VPN or private network instead.

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

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

Keep watching sitescorechecker.com

This scan found 17 issues across 7 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
87
Security headers
85
Email security
75
DNS health
95
Network security
45
Website hygiene
80
GDPR outside view
74
Average
77

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.
  • Accessibility: Accessibility is a separate readout from security, so it is reported but not scored. 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 sitescorechecker.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
2
Employees
0
Customers
2
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
0%

1 subdomain affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for sitescorechecker.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)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 company positions itself as a free SEO tool provider, leveraging a freemium model with monetization via Google Adsense ads. Its competitive advantage lies in offering a comprehensive suite of SEO and website analysis tools in one place, accessible without cost. The target market includes SEO professionals and website owners globally. The lack of explicit contact information and privacy policies may limit trust for some users. The business appears to be independent with no parent or subsidiary companies identified. Growth potential exists through expanding tool offerings and improving compliance and trust signals.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic to moderate security posture with HTTPS enforced and secure form handling. However, it lacks important security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options, which could mitigate common web attacks. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, which is a gap in security readiness. There is no evidence of exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries. Privacy compliance is insufficient, lacking GDPR-related disclosures and cookie consent mechanisms. Overall, the security maturity is adequate for a small web service but requires enhancements to meet higher compliance and security standards.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy with GDPR compliance details.
  2. Add security headers like Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to improve security posture.
  3. Provide clear contact information including support or security contact emails to enhance trust and incident response readiness.
  4. Introduce a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party libraries and scripts to avoid vulnerabilities and improve performance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Site Score Checker
Description
Site Score Checker helps to identify your SEO mistakes and optimize your web page contents for a better search engine ranking.
Key services
SEO audit, PageSpeed Insights, Mobile optimization checks, Backlink tools, Various SEO and website analysis tools
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap CSS, Font Awesome, Google Fonts, Google Adsense, Google Tag Manager (gtag.js), jQuery (implied by Bootstrap usage), JSON-LD structured data
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No visible exposed sensitive data
  • Secure form submission via POST

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (gtag.js)
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Adsense
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website offers a comprehensive suite of free SEO and website analysis tools
  2. No explicit privacy or cookie policies found, which is a compliance gap
  3. Uses Google Adsense for monetization
  4. Mobile responsive design with good SEO metadata and structured data
  5. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly provided on the homepage
  6. No visible security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern and standard technology stack including Bootstrap for responsive design, Font Awesome for icons, and Google Fonts for typography. It integrates Google Adsense for advertising and Google Analytics for user tracking. The site is mobile optimized and uses JSON-LD structured data for SEO enhancement. Performance is moderate with some asynchronous loading of scripts. There is no indication of a CMS, suggesting a custom-built or static site. Technical risks include missing security headers and lack of explicit privacy and cookie management, which could impact compliance and user trust.
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 sitescorechecker.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 sitescorechecker.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.