Skip to main content

Security report for twitterdb.com

Technology · N/a

High risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

49/100

Risk levelHigh

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

TwitterDB is a small technology project focused on aggregating and providing historical data on Twitter tags and hashtags. The website offers search and statistical analysis of over 96 million unique tags and 20 million hashtags, processing more than 1.8 billion tweets over approximately one year. However, the project is archived and no longer updated due to changes in Twitter's API, with all data frozen as of April 1, 2023. The site targets researchers, social media analysts, and data enthusiasts interested in Twitter trends. Technically, the website is built using Angular 12, hosted by Hetzner Online GmbH, and uses Cloudflare DNS without DNSSEC. The site has moderate performance and basic mobile optimization. SEO and accessibility are basic, with no advanced compliance or security headers detected. No privacy or cookie policies are present, and no contact or incident response information is provided, limiting transparency and compliance. From a security perspective, the site lacks DNSSEC, security headers, and visible incident response contacts. The SSL configuration is unknown but presumed present due to Cloudflare DNS usage. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The WHOIS data is consistent and legitimate, with domain registration dating back to 2021, matching the site's operational timeline. Overall, the website scores moderately on business credibility and technical implementation but scores low on privacy compliance and security posture. The absence of privacy policies and contact information, combined with minimal security controls, suggests areas for improvement. The site content is safe for general audiences, with no adult or explicit material detected.

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

8 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 twitterdb.com

This scan found 27 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
72
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
60
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
35
Average
49

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 twitterdb.com, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for twitterdb.com right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

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

TwitterDB operates in the technology sector as a niche data analytics platform specializing in Twitter tag and hashtag historical data. Its business model centers on data aggregation and providing search and statistical insights. The platform's market position is limited due to its archival status and lack of ongoing updates. The target audience includes researchers and social media analysts. The project appears to be a small-scale initiative without parent or subsidiary companies. Revenue streams and partnerships are not evident from the available data. The lack of privacy and security policies may impact user trust and regulatory compliance.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a low to moderate security maturity level. Key gaps include the absence of DNSSEC, missing security headers, and no published security or incident response policies. There is no evidence of GDPR compliance or data protection officer contact information. The site uses HTTPS (implied by Cloudflare DNS and modern scripts) but lacks visible enforcement details. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found in the HTML content. Incident response readiness appears minimal due to lack of contact channels. Overall, the security culture seems informal, consistent with a small, archived project.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement standard HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve GDPR compliance and user trust.
  4. Add clear contact information including a security or abuse contact email to support incident response.
  5. Conduct a security review to ensure SSL/TLS configuration is strong and enforce HTTPS site-wide.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Search for the history of any tag or hashtag you want. The site stores historical data of Twitter tags and hashtags, processing over 1.8 billion tweets over more than a year.
Key services
Historical tag and hashtag search, Statistics and trend analysis, API access (not currently active)
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
Angular 12, Google Fonts (Poppins), Cloudflare DNS
Frameworks
Angular
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
40/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is archived and no longer updated due to Twitter API changes.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers provided.
  4. Site uses Angular framework and Cloudflare DNS but no DNSSEC.
  5. No visible security headers or incident response info.
  6. Content is focused on Twitter tag/hashtag historical data analytics.
  7. No advertising or tracking scripts detected.
  8. No social media links or company branding beyond site title and author meta tag.
  9. WHOIS data shows domain registered with Hetzner Online GmbH since 2021.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Angular 12, indicating a modern single-page application framework. It uses Google Fonts for typography and Cloudflare DNS for domain resolution. Hosting is provided by Hetzner Online GmbH, a reputable provider. The site loads multiple deferred JavaScript bundles, suggesting modular code splitting. Performance is moderate with basic mobile optimization and accessibility features. SEO is basic, with meta keywords and description present but no advanced structured data or Open Graph tags. No CMS or third-party analytics/tracking scripts were detected, indicating limited technical complexity and minimal tracking.
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 twitterdb.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 twitterdb.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.