Skip to main content

Security report for typo.social

Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Email security and 1 other check.

Security score

63/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Typo.social is an independent Mastodon instance catering to typo and type enthusiasts, providing a free social networking platform within the fediverse. The site offers trending posts, a profile directory, and an open registration model, positioning itself as a niche community server. Technically, it leverages Mastodon version 4.4.3 with React and modern JavaScript modules, delivering a responsive and user-friendly experience. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS implied but lacking explicit security headers and incident response contacts. Privacy compliance is basic, with a privacy policy present but no cookie consent or terms of service pages. Overall, the site is legitimate and functional but could improve in compliance and security transparency.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of typo.social. View the latest report

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

4 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 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

  2. 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.

    • High

      No SPF record found

      SPF helps prevent email spoofing

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

  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 typo.social

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. 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
72
Security headers
75
Email security
45
DNS health
85
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
58
Average
63

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 operates as a small-scale social network server within the decentralized fediverse ecosystem, targeting a specialized audience of typography enthusiasts. Its business model is community-driven and likely volunteer-supported, with no evident monetization or advertising. The presence of an active user base (~700 monthly active users) and visible admin account indicates operational stability. External links to Mastodon resources and related social domains suggest integration with the broader fediverse community. The lack of formal business registration data and contact details aligns with typical independent open-source community projects.

Security posture

Security maturity is moderate; the site uses HTTPS and avoids exposing sensitive data in the HTML. However, it lacks visible security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, or X-Frame-Options, which are recommended best practices. No vulnerability disclosures or incident response contacts are published, limiting transparency. Privacy compliance is partial, with a privacy policy but no cookie consent mechanism. The absence of terms of service and security policies may expose the platform to legal and operational risks. No signs of malware or phishing were detected. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a community server but should be enhanced for better protection and compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner to comply with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  3. Publish clear terms of service and security policy pages to improve transparency.
  4. Provide explicit contact information for security incidents and abuse reporting.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve usability for all users.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Welcome to Typo.social! This is a Mastodon instance open to any typo and type enthusiastic. We are offering this service out of sheer courtesy without being held responsible for any disadvantages.
Key services
Mastodon social networking, Public timeline and trending posts, User profile directory
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Mastodon 4.4.3, React, JavaScript ES Modules, SVG icons, CSS with integrity hashes
Frameworks
Mastodon, React
Platforms
Fediverse
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of HTTPS (implied by URL)
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a Mastodon instance focused on typo and type enthusiasts.
  2. Content is accessible and not blocked by WAF or security challenges.
  3. WHOIS data is unavailable due to TLD restrictions and privacy.
  4. No explicit contact emails or phone numbers found on the page.
  5. Privacy policy is present but cookie consent is missing.
  6. No terms of service or security policy pages detected.
  7. Site uses modern JavaScript modules and React framework.
  8. No advertising or tracking scripts detected.
  9. Content is safe and suitable for general audiences.
  10. Site branding and UI are consistent and professional.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the Mastodon open-source social networking platform, version 4.4.3, utilizing React and modern JavaScript ES modules. The front-end assets include SVG icons and CSS with integrity hashes, indicating attention to resource integrity. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and basic accessibility features. Performance is moderate, with no major errors or broken elements detected. SEO is basic with meta tags and Open Graph data present but no advanced structured data like JSON-LD for organization or breadcrumbs. Hosting provider details are not disclosed. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid for a community-driven social platform but could benefit from enhanced SEO and accessibility improvements.
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. 63/100 +3Medium29 findingsView report
  2. 60/100Medium31 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with typo.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 typo.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.