Skip to main content

Security report for treehouse.systems

Treehouse Systems · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

58/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Treehouse Systems is a small community-oriented technology site focused on providing a simple homepage for a group of friends navigating the tech industry. The website is built using the Hugo static site generator and hosted likely via bunny.net, leveraging minimal JavaScript libraries such as jQuery and medium-zoom for image interactions. The site is lightweight and mobile-optimized but lacks comprehensive content and business information. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS enforced and domain status protections, but lacks DNSSEC and security headers. Privacy and compliance policies are absent, and no contact information is provided, limiting trust and transparency. Overall, the site serves as a basic community portal with room for improvement in security, compliance, and content richness.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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

6 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 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 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

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

Keep watching treehouse.systems

This scan found 21 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
95
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
50
Average
58

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

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 treehouse.systems, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
7
Employees
0
Customers
7
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
0%

2 subdomains 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 treehouse.systems.

Select it in the checkout above.

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

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

The business operates as a small community under the parent organization Private by Design, LLC, founded in 2021 in the US. It targets a general audience of tech industry peers and friends, focusing on community engagement rather than commercial services. The business model is community-driven with no evident revenue streams or commercial offerings. External links to Discord, Mastodon, and Gitea subdomains indicate a focus on social and collaborative platforms. The lack of formal policies and contact details suggests an informal operation with limited market positioning beyond its niche community.

Security posture

Security maturity is basic to moderate. The domain benefits from clientDeleteProhibited and clientTransferProhibited statuses, reducing risk of unauthorized domain changes. However, DNSSEC is not enabled, and no security headers are detected in the HTML content, which could expose the site to certain web-based attacks. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates compliance gaps, particularly regarding GDPR. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are published, limiting readiness for security events. The site uses HTTPS, which is a positive baseline. Overall, security practices are minimal but adequate for a low-risk community site.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Publish clear privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  3. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Implement a security.txt file or vulnerability disclosure policy to facilitate responsible reporting.
  5. Provide contact information for security incidents and general inquiries to improve transparency.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Treehouse Systems
Description
We’re a community of friends mostly surviving the tech industry.
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
Hugo, Blowfish, jQuery, medium-zoom
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
60/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced (implied by canonical URL https://treehouse.systems/)
  • Domain status clientDeleteProhibited and clientTransferProhibited

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a simple community homepage with minimal content.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers provided.
  4. No forms detected on the homepage.
  5. Uses Hugo static site generator and minimal JavaScript.
  6. No analytics or tracking scripts detected.
  7. No security headers visible in provided data.
  8. Domain uses privacy protection but is consistent with business type.
  9. External links point to community-related subdomains and official Hugo and Blowfish sites.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern static site generator (Hugo) combined with Blowfish for styling or tooling, and uses minimal JavaScript libraries including jQuery and medium-zoom for enhanced UX. Hosting is inferred to be via bunny.net based on nameservers, which is a reputable CDN and hosting provider. The site is mobile-optimized and uses canonical URLs and meta tags for SEO, though metadata is minimal. Performance is likely moderate due to static content delivery. Accessibility features are basic with skip links and responsive design. No analytics or tracking scripts are present, indicating a privacy-conscious approach. The technical stack is modern but minimalistic, suitable for a small community site.
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 treehouse.systems. 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 treehouse.systems.

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.