Skip to main content

Security report for stakingrewards.com

Staking Rewards · Finance · N/a

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

Security score

72/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Staking Rewards operates as a leading institutional yield aggregator specializing in cryptocurrency staking opportunities. The platform offers comprehensive staking data, verified staking provider programs, and exclusive yield opportunities targeted primarily at institutional investors and crypto asset holders. Their market position is strong within the niche of staking yield aggregation, supported by partnerships and events such as the Staking Summit. Technically, the website is built on modern frameworks like Next.js and React, with robust performance and mobile optimization. The use of multiple analytics and monitoring tools indicates a mature digital infrastructure. Security posture is solid with HTTPS enforcement and security headers, though there is room for improvement in visible privacy compliance and incident response transparency. Overall, the website presents a professional and trustworthy front, though the absence of WHOIS data slightly impacts domain trustworthiness.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of stakingrewards.com. 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

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"

    • 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

  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 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 stakingrewards.com

This scan found 19 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
35
Email security
80
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
72

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 targets institutional investors seeking to maximize staking returns through aggregated data and vetted staking providers. Their business model revolves around providing data APIs, verified provider programs, and exclusive staking offers, generating revenue likely through subscriptions and partnerships. The presence of a dedicated staking summit event indicates active community engagement and brand positioning. The ecosystem includes partnerships with event organizers and recruitment platforms, enhancing operational capabilities. Growth indicators include a comprehensive staking data API and institutional-grade offerings. The company maintains a consistent brand image and leverages trusted industry logos to build credibility.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, multiple security headers, and integration of monitoring tools like New Relic and Hotjar. However, there is a lack of publicly available security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms, which are important for transparency and compliance. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. GDPR compliance is partially addressed via a privacy policy, but cookie consent mechanisms are missing. The absence of WHOIS data raises minor concerns about domain registration transparency but does not directly impact site security.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a visible cookie consent banner to enhance GDPR compliance and user trust.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency.
  3. Add a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Provide clear and accessible contact information for business and security inquiries.
  5. Investigate and resolve the missing WHOIS data to improve domain registration transparency and trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Staking Rewards
Description
Staking Rewards is the leading institutional yield aggregator. Access market leading staking opportunities and earn 20% more on your crypto holdings.
Key services
Staking data API, Verified Staking Provider program, Institutional staking yield offers, Staking Summit event
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
React, Next.js, JavaScript, New Relic, Hotjar, Google Tag Manager, Microsoft Clarity, Intercom
Frameworks
Next.js, React
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Security headers present
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security monitoring scripts

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via GTM proxy), Hotjar, Microsoft Clarity, New Relic
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Adsense
Tracking pixels
Hotjar, Microsoft Clarity, New Relic, Intercom, HubSpot, Userpilot
Marketing tools
HubSpot, Userpilot
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 no blocking or WAF challenge.
  2. WHOIS data is missing or unavailable, which is unusual for an established domain.
  3. Strong institutional focus on staking yield aggregation and data services.
  4. Good use of modern web technologies and analytics tools.
  5. Privacy and security policies are present but could be more detailed and visible.
  6. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on main pages.
  7. No cookie consent banner detected despite GDPR relevance.
  8. Multiple trusted partner logos and verified staking provider program enhance credibility.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern web technologies including React and Next.js, ensuring fast performance and excellent mobile responsiveness. Hosting appears to be via Cloudflare, providing CDN and security benefits. The site uses multiple analytics and marketing tools such as Google Tag Manager, Hotjar, Microsoft Clarity, and Intercom, indicating a sophisticated approach to user engagement and monitoring. The HTML and CSS are valid and well-structured, supporting good SEO and accessibility. There is no evidence of technical debt or outdated libraries. Opportunities exist to enhance privacy compliance and security transparency.
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. 72/100Medium27 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with stakingrewards.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 stakingrewards.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.