Skip to main content

Security report for turtleisland.social

TurtleIsland.social · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Email security, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

67/100

Risk levelMedium

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

TurtleIsland.social is a niche Mastodon instance dedicated to serving Native/Indigenous people and their true Allies, providing a decentralized, ad-free, and culturally respectful social media platform. Founded in 2023 and administered by members of the Mvskoke Nation, it emphasizes Indigenous sovereignty and community safety through strict moderation policies. The platform leverages the Mastodon open-source software and is federated with the broader Fediverse network, enabling users to interact across multiple instances. The business model is donation and administrator funded, with no fees charged to users.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
58/ 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. 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.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

    • High

      No SPF record found

      SPF helps prevent email spoofing

      What to do: Add SPF record: "v=spf1 include:_spf.yourmailprovider.com ~all"

  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

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

Keep watching turtleisland.social

This scan found 23 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
52
Security headers
75
Email security
40
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
58
Average
67

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 platform occupies a specialized market position within the decentralized social media ecosystem, focusing on Indigenous community needs and cultural respect. Its competitive advantage lies in its strict moderation aligned with Indigenous standards and rejection of corporate or bigoted influences. The target audience is clearly defined, and the platform fosters community trust through transparent rules and direct admin contact. Revenue streams are limited to donations, reflecting a community-first approach rather than commercial ambitions. Partnerships are minimal, focusing on open-source Mastodon and Fediverse integration.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS with good SSL configuration and domain status protections to prevent unauthorized domain changes. However, DNSSEC is not enabled, and no explicit security headers were detected in the HTML content, indicating room for improvement. The platform enforces strict community rules to mitigate abuse and bigotry, contributing to a secure user environment. Incident response and security policies are not publicly documented, which could be enhanced to improve transparency and readiness. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could benefit from technical hardening and policy disclosures.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC to improve domain security and prevent DNS spoofing.
  2. Implement and publish explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options.
  3. Develop and publicly share a comprehensive security policy and incident response plan.
  4. Add a cookie policy and consent mechanism to enhance privacy compliance.
  5. Consider publishing terms of service to clarify user rights and responsibilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
TurtleIsland.social
Description
Native owned and operated Mastodon instance for Native/Indigenous people and true Allies only. Ad-free, corporate-free, bigotry-free, and culture respectful social media platform.
Key services
Decentralized social media hosting, Community moderation to Indigenous standards, Federation with Fediverse instances
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Mastodon 4.4.1, JavaScript ES modules, React, DigitalOcean hosting
Frameworks
Mastodon
Platforms
Fediverse
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Domain status includes clientDeleteProhibited and other EPP protections
  • Moderation policies to prevent abuse

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
excellent

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a Mastodon instance focused on Native/Indigenous people and Allies.
  2. Strong community rules and moderation policies.
  3. No advertising or tracking detected.
  4. Uses modern web technologies and is hosted on DigitalOcean.
  5. No explicit privacy or security policy pages beyond basic privacy policy.
  6. No terms of service or cookie policy found.
  7. Domain uses privacy protection but is consistent with business claims.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Mastodon 4.4.1, utilizing modern JavaScript ES modules and React for frontend components. Hosting is provided by DigitalOcean, a reputable cloud provider. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and basic accessibility features. SEO is basic but includes essential meta tags and Open Graph data. The site does not use a traditional CMS but relies on Mastodon's platform capabilities. Technical debt appears low, but improvements in security headers and privacy compliance would enhance the overall technical maturity.
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 turtleisland.social. 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 turtleisland.social.

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.