Skip to main content

Security report for v0.dev

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 12 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 3 other checks.

Security score

58/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website at v0.dev is currently inaccessible due to a Vercel Security Checkpoint blocking access with a browser verification failure (Code 10). This checkpoint page contains minimal content and no business or contact information, indicating that the actual website content is not available for analysis. The page requires JavaScript to proceed and provides a link for the website owner to resolve the issue. The site is hosted on Vercel, a reputable platform, but the security checkpoint prevents any meaningful content or metadata extraction. Consequently, privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies are absent, and no contact or business details are visible. The technical stack includes JavaScript and Astro framework, but no analytics or advertising scripts are detected.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of v0.dev. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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

12 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

  2. 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';…

  3. 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

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

Keep watching v0.dev

This scan found 27 issues across 7 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
57
Security headers
20
Email security
40
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
58

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

Due to the blocking security checkpoint, no business intelligence data such as company name, market position, or services can be determined. The domain uses privacy protection for WHOIS data, which is typical for developer or platform domains. No partnerships or related domains are identified. The lack of accessible content and contact information limits any assessment of business credibility or market presence.

Security posture

The security posture is currently limited by the presence of a security checkpoint that blocks access to the site content. While this indicates some level of security enforcement, no security headers or SSL configuration details are visible. There are no visible privacy or compliance policies, and no incident response contacts are provided. The checkpoint may be triggered by suspicious activity or misconfiguration, but without further data, no vulnerabilities or compliance gaps can be confirmed.

Recommendations

  1. Resolve the browser verification failure to allow legitimate users access to the website content.
  2. Publish clear privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies to improve compliance and trust.
  3. Add visible contact information including security incident response contacts.
  4. Implement and verify security headers and SSL/TLS configuration for enhanced security posture.
  5. Ensure accessibility and SEO best practices once the site is accessible.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Vercel Security Checkpoint detected. Page is a security checkpoint blocking access due to failed browser verification (Code 10). Content is minimal and access is restricted. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
JavaScript
Frameworks
Astro
Platforms
Vercel
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website is currently blocked by a security checkpoint page from Vercel.
  2. No visible business or contact information on the page.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  4. No forms or data collection elements present.
  5. Minimal textual content indicating browser verification failure.
  6. JavaScript is required to proceed; no content without JS.
  7. External link to vercel.link for site owner to fix the issue.
  8. No analytics or advertising scripts detected.
  9. No social media or contact emails found.
  10. Page is likely a temporary security measure rather than a full website.
Technical notes

Notes

The site uses JavaScript and the Astro framework, hosted on Vercel. The page is minimal and serves as a security checkpoint rather than a full website. No CMS or analytics tools are detected. Performance and mobile optimization cannot be fully assessed due to blocked content. The site requires JavaScript to function, and no forms or data collection mechanisms are present on the checkpoint page.
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. 60/100Medium33 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with v0.dev. 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 v0.dev.

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.