Skip to main content

Security report for sonyfuturefilmmakerawards.com

Sony Future Filmmaker Awards · Media

Partial score · DNS & email only

75/100

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

The website demonstrates a generally strong security posture with no critical issues and high scores in SSL/TLS and network security modules. However, significant gaps exist in security headers configuration, email security protocols, and compliance with GDPR and NIS2 requirements, which could expose the business to risks such as data breaches, regulatory penalties, and reputational damage. Missing key HTTP headers like Strict-Transport-Security and Content-Security-Policy increase vulnerability to man-in-the-middle and cross-site scripting attacks. Email authentication weaknesses, including lack of enforced DMARC and absent DKIM records, raise the risk of phishing and email spoofing. Additionally, the absence of DNSSEC and incomplete policy records weaken DNS security, potentially enabling DNS spoofing attacks. Addressing these medium and high severity issues will enhance overall protection and regulatory compliance, safeguarding customer trust and business continuity. Immediate remediation focused on security headers and email authentication will yield the most impactful risk reduction.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

NIS2 outside view
Not assessed
GDPR outside view
Not assessed

Both readouts depend on the site's pages, which could not be loaded in this scan.

Priority findings

2 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 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';…

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

Keep watching sonyfuturefilmmakerawards.com

This scan found 12 issues across 4 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
100
Security headers
40
Email security
70
DNS health
85
Network security
100
Average
79
After the cap
75

Not counted

  • GDPR outside view: did not complete in this scan.
  • 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.

Technical notes

Notes

The assessment identified two high severity issues related to missing critical HTTP security headers: Strict-Transport-Security (HSTS) and Content-Security-Policy (CSP). HSTS is essential to ensure browsers only connect securely via HTTPS, mitigating man-in-the-middle threats. CSP restricts sources of executable scripts, reducing the risk of XSS attacks. Medium severity concerns include absent X-XSS-Protection and Permissions-Policy headers, which further weaken client-side protections. On the email security front, DMARC is not enforcing policies, and DKIM records are missing, leaving email channels susceptible to spoofing and phishing. The GDPR and NIS2 compliance failures highlight potential regulatory nonconformance risks. DNS health is compromised by lack of DNSSEC, which protects against DNS spoofing, and missing CAA records, which control certificate issuance. Although SSL/TLS and network security are well implemented, these gaps represent significant vectors for exploitation if unaddressed.
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 sonyfuturefilmmakerawards.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 sonyfuturefilmmakerawards.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.