Skip to main content

Security report for twitter.com

X Corp. · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

72/100

Risk levelMedium

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

X.com is the official website of X Corp., formerly known as Twitter, a leading global social media platform specializing in microblogging and social networking services. The platform targets a general audience and operates on a business model combining advertising and subscription services. The website demonstrates consistent branding and provides comprehensive legal and privacy documentation, reflecting a mature and professional online presence. Technically, the website employs modern web technologies including React, Tailwind CSS, and GraphQL, ensuring a fast and responsive user experience optimized for both desktop and mobile platforms. The infrastructure appears robust, leveraging advanced bot mitigation tools such as Arkose Labs and payment processing via Stripe, indicating a sophisticated digital maturity. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS with strong SSL configurations and domain security measures such as clientDeleteProhibited status flags. However, DNSSEC is not enabled, and explicit security policies or incident response contacts are not publicly available, representing areas for improvement. The cookie consent mechanism and privacy policy indicate good privacy compliance, including GDPR adherence. Overall, the website is trustworthy, professionally designed, and secure, with no indications of adult or explicit content. The domain's long history and registration details further reinforce legitimacy. Strategic recommendations include enabling DNSSEC, publishing a security policy and incident response contacts, and adding a security.txt file to enhance vulnerability disclosure transparency.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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. 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

    • 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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Twitter

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

  2. 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 twitter.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
52
Security headers
80
Email security
80
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
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

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 twitter.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
19,613,186
Employees
2,162
Customers
19,608,970
Third parties
2,054
Weak passwords
17%

Latest record dated 2026-06-17 · 2,890 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 twitter.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • –twitter.com2026-06-17
  • –mobile.twitter.com2026-06-17
  • –mobile.twitter.com2026-06-17
  • –twitter.com2026-06-16
  • –twitter.com2026-06-16

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

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

X Corp. holds a dominant position in the social media industry, leveraging its extensive user base and brand recognition. Its business model is diversified across advertising revenue and subscription services, targeting a broad demographic globally. The company maintains partnerships and integrations with payment processors and security providers, supporting its operational ecosystem. Growth indicators include continuous feature enhancements and compliance with evolving privacy regulations. The platform's competitive advantage lies in its real-time communication capabilities and extensive developer ecosystem. The website reflects these business strengths through comprehensive legal documentation, consistent branding, and integration of advanced technologies. However, direct contact information is limited, which is typical for large enterprises but may impact user support accessibility.

Security posture

The security posture of X.com is strong, with enforced HTTPS, secure domain registration practices, and use of anti-bot technologies. The presence of cookie consent and privacy policies aligns with regulatory requirements. However, the absence of DNSSEC and lack of publicly available security policies or incident response contacts represent gaps in transparency and potential risk management. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analyzed content. The site demonstrates adherence to security best practices but could improve in incident response readiness and vulnerability disclosure. Compliance with GDPR is evident, but additional certifications or frameworks (e.g., ISO 27001, NIST) are not explicitly mentioned. Overall, the security maturity is high but with room for enhancement in policy transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC to strengthen DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and compliance.
  3. Provide clear incident response contact channels, including security@ or abuse@ emails.
  4. Implement and publish a security.txt file to facilitate responsible vulnerability disclosure.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all users.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
X Corp.
Description
X (formerly Twitter) is a social media platform providing microblogging and social networking services.
Key services
Microblogging, Social networking, Advertising services, Subscription services
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
React, JavaScript, Tailwind CSS, GraphQL, Arkose Labs (anti-bot), Stripe (payments), AWS or cloud hosting (implied)
Frameworks
React
Platforms
Web
Performance
fast
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Domain status includes clientDeleteProhibited etc.
  • Use of Arkose Labs for bot mitigation
  • Cookie consent mechanism present

Analytics and tracking

Services
Twitter Analytics
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Twitter Ads
Tracking pixels
Twitter Pixel
Marketing tools
Stripe (payments), Arkose Labs (bot prevention)
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website requires JavaScript for full functionality; fallback page shown if disabled.
  2. Comprehensive privacy, cookie, and terms of service pages present.
  3. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on main page or metadata.
  4. Use of modern web technologies and frameworks.
  5. Strong domain security posture but DNSSEC not enabled.
  6. Cookie consent mechanism implemented.
  7. No explicit security policy or incident response contacts published.
  8. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found.
  9. Content is safe and suitable for general audiences.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern technology stack featuring React and Tailwind CSS, ensuring responsive and performant user interfaces. The use of GraphQL indicates advanced API management. The site loads quickly and is optimized for mobile devices. The infrastructure likely relies on major cloud providers, though explicit hosting details are not disclosed. Technical debt appears minimal, with ongoing feature development and performance optimizations evident. Opportunities exist to improve accessibility and SEO further. Security technologies such as Arkose Labs for bot mitigation and Stripe for payments demonstrate integration of specialized services to mitigate risks and support business operations.
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. 78/100 −5Low27 findingsView report
  2. 83/100Low20 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with twitter.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 twitter.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.