Skip to main content

Security report for spacexchimp.com

Space X Chimp OÜ · Technology · Estonia

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

74/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Space X Chimp OÜ is a small technology company based in Estonia specializing in web, mobile, and desktop application development with a strong focus on WordPress themes and plugins. The company offers a range of digital products including icon design, WordPress themes, and plugins, serving a global audience of creative professionals and developers. Their market position is niche but established, with over 100,000 active installs of their products and a loyal customer base. Technically, the website is well-built using modern web standards including HTML5, CSS3, PHP, and JavaScript, with integrations of Google Analytics and Tag Manager for performance and user behavior tracking. The site is mobile-optimized and demonstrates good SEO and accessibility practices. Security-wise, the site enforces HTTPS and includes multiple trust verification meta tags, but lacks some advanced security headers and a dedicated security policy page. The absence of WHOIS data for the domain is a notable concern, reducing domain trustworthiness despite the professional presentation and business legitimacy. Overall, the website is secure, professional, and compliant with privacy regulations, but would benefit from improved transparency in domain registration and enhanced security headers.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
65/ 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

5 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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

  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

  3. 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.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching spacexchimp.com

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
57
Security headers
75
Email security
65
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
65
Average
74

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

The company operates a digital product sales and software development business model, targeting WordPress users and creative professionals worldwide. Their revenue streams likely include sales of premium WordPress themes and plugins, supported by an affiliate program. The presence of a blog and helpdesk indicates a focus on customer engagement and support. The company leverages partnerships such as the linked blog site mycyberuniverse.com to extend its reach. Growth indicators include millions of plugin downloads and thousands of active installs. The business is positioned as a trusted provider within its niche, emphasizing quality and customer satisfaction. Strategic observations suggest opportunities for expanding security transparency and enhancing incident response capabilities to strengthen market trust.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with HTTPS enforced and multiple trust verification meta tags from Google, Yandex, Microsoft, Norton, and McAfee. The use of secure cookies and absence of exposed sensitive data are positive indicators. However, the lack of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options represents a gap in defense-in-depth. No vulnerability disclosures or incident response contacts are published, which could hinder rapid response to security events. GDPR compliance is indicated through privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms. The missing WHOIS data reduces overall trust and may pose a risk if domain ownership cannot be verified. Overall, the security posture is good but could be improved by publishing a security policy, adding missing headers, and enhancing transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive security policy and incident response plan on the website.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Improve domain registration transparency by ensuring WHOIS data is available and accurate to increase trustworthiness.
  4. Regularly audit third-party scripts and dependencies to mitigate risks from vulnerable libraries.
  5. Enhance user trust by providing clear data retention policies and expanding contact options including phone support.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Space X Chimp OÜ
Description
Space X Chimp OÜ is a creative studio and online software store specializing in web, mobile, and desktop app development, including WordPress themes, plugins, and icon design.
Key services
Icons Designing, WordPress Themes Development, WordPress Plugins Development, Web App Development
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, PHP, JavaScript, jQuery, FontAwesome, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, AOS (Animate On Scroll), Cookies.js
Platforms
WordPress (implied by product offerings)
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of security verification meta tags
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of secure cookies library

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and professional design.
  2. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.
  3. WHOIS data is missing, which is a concern for domain legitimacy verification.
  4. Strong presence of trust signals and security verification meta tags.
  5. Good privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms.
  6. No contact phone numbers found; only email and contact form available.
  7. Use of modern web technologies and analytics tools.
  8. No adult or questionable content detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a solid technical foundation using modern web technologies including HTML5, CSS3, PHP, and JavaScript with jQuery and FontAwesome for UI elements. It integrates Google Analytics and Tag Manager for analytics and tracking, and uses AOS for animations. The site is hosted behind Cloudflare, providing CDN and security benefits. Performance is fast with good mobile optimization and accessibility features. The use of structured data (JSON-LD) improves SEO and content discoverability. Technical debt appears low, but opportunities exist to implement additional security headers and improve WHOIS transparency. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a professional and scalable digital presence.
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. 77/100Low27 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with spacexchimp.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 spacexchimp.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.