Skip to main content

Security report for typo.social

typo.social · Technology · Netherlands

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

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

typo.social is a niche Mastodon instance catering to typography enthusiasts, providing a free and open social networking platform within the fediverse. The website leverages the Mastodon 4.4.2 platform with modern web technologies including React and Ruby on Rails. It offers a focused community experience with approximately 686 active users, administered by an identified admin account. The domain is relatively new, registered in 2022, and hosted under a reputable registrar in the Netherlands. The site is accessible without any WAF or security challenges, indicating good availability and user access. Technically, the site employs HTTPS with good SSL configuration and uses integrity attributes on scripts and stylesheets, enhancing security. However, it lacks advanced security headers and explicit security policies, which could be improved. Privacy compliance is basic, with a privacy policy present but no cookie consent mechanism or terms of service published. The site does not appear to engage in advertising or extensive user tracking, aligning with privacy-friendly practices. Security posture is moderate, with no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data, but improvements are recommended in DNSSEC deployment and security header implementation. The business model is community-driven and open source, with no commercial advertising or tracking. Overall, typo.social presents a trustworthy and focused social platform with room for enhanced security and privacy compliance. Strategic recommendations include enabling DNSSEC, publishing comprehensive security and incident response policies, implementing cookie consent mechanisms, and adding terms of service to improve legal clarity and user trust.

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 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
72
Security headers
75
Email security
45
DNS health
70
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
58
Average
60

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

typo.social operates as a small independent Mastodon instance targeting typography and type enthusiasts. Its market position is niche within the broader fediverse social networking ecosystem. The platform benefits from the open source Mastodon software, enabling decentralized social networking without ads or algorithms. Revenue streams are not evident, suggesting a community or volunteer-supported model. The target audience is specialized, focusing on users interested in typography and related topics. The platform's partnership ecosystem is limited, with no explicit partners or subsidiaries identified. Growth indicators include a modest active user base and ongoing platform updates. Strategic observations highlight the importance of enhancing privacy and security policies to build greater user trust and compliance.

Security posture

The security maturity of typo.social is moderate. The site uses HTTPS with good SSL configuration and script integrity checks, reducing risks of man-in-the-middle attacks and script tampering. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security limits protection against DNS spoofing and clickjacking. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are published, which may delay response to security events. Privacy compliance is basic, lacking cookie consent and GDPR explicit indicators. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a small community platform but requires enhancements to meet higher compliance and security standards.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Publish clear security policies and incident response procedures accessible to users.
  4. Add cookie consent mechanisms to comply with GDPR and enhance user privacy transparency.
  5. Publish terms of service to clarify user rights and platform policies.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
typo.social
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, Fediverse participation
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Mastodon 4.4.2, Ruby on Rails, React, JavaScript ES Modules, SVG icons
Frameworks
Mastodon, Rails
Platforms
Fediverse
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of integrity attributes on scripts and stylesheets

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 social platform focused on typography enthusiasts.
  2. Content is accessible and not blocked by WAF or security challenges.
  3. No explicit privacy or cookie consent mechanisms found.
  4. No terms of service or security incident response policies published.
  5. Uses modern web technologies and open source Mastodon platform.
  6. WHOIS data shows domain is relatively new but legitimate.
  7. No advertising or tracking services detected.
  8. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly provided.
  9. Site uses HTTPS with good SSL configuration but lacks advanced security headers.
Technical notes

Notes

typo.social is built on the Mastodon 4.4.2 platform using Ruby on Rails and React, leveraging modern JavaScript ES modules and SVG icons for UI. The site uses HTTPS with valid SSL certificates and includes integrity attributes on scripts and stylesheets, indicating attention to security in resource loading. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and basic accessibility features. SEO optimization is basic with meta tags and Open Graph data present. Hosting is via Cronon GmbH with DNS servers at rzone.de. The site lacks advanced security headers and cookie consent mechanisms, representing technical debt in compliance and security best practices. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid but could benefit from modernization in security and privacy implementations.
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. 63/100Medium29 findingsView report
  2. 63/100Medium29 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.