Skip to main content

Security report for walldman.com

Other · N/a

Partial score · DNS & email only

54/100

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

The website walldman.com is currently non-functional due to a server-side error resulting in an HTTP 500 status and a JavaScript null reference error. The domain is newly registered in April 2023, indicating a recent startup or project. The site uses modern technologies such as Nuxt.js, Supabase, Stripe, and Microsoft Clarity for analytics, but the core content and business information are missing or inaccessible. There are no privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies detected, nor any contact information or social media links. Security posture is weak with no DNSSEC, no security headers, and no visible HTTPS enforcement details. Tracking scripts for Microsoft Clarity and Facebook Pixel are present, indicating some level of user analytics and marketing integration. Overall, the site lacks professionalism, content quality, and trust indicators, resulting in a low AI score and high risk for visitors and business credibility.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
Checks completed
6of 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

5 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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.

    • Critical

      Unable to retrieve SSL certificate

      Could not establish secure connection to retrieve certificate information

      What to do: Check if the server is accessible and SSL/TLS is properly configured

  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

    • 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: Facebook

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

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

Keep watching walldman.com

This scan found 15 issues across 5 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
0
Email security
55
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
54

Not counted

  • Security headers: did not complete in this scan.
  • 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 lack of accessible content and business information, it is difficult to ascertain the market positioning or business model of walldman.com. The domain age and registrar data suggest a new entity without established presence. The use of Stripe and Supabase hints at an e-commerce or SaaS model, but no explicit services or products are described. The absence of contact details and policies limits trust and compliance. No partnerships or subsidiaries are identified. The site appears to be in early development or experiencing technical issues preventing normal operation.

Security posture

The security posture of walldman.com is currently poor. The site lacks DNSSEC, security headers, and visible HTTPS enforcement. The server-side error causing HTTP 500 indicates unstable backend infrastructure. No incident response or security policies are published. Tracking scripts are present but without visible privacy compliance mechanisms. The domain registration is straightforward but new, with no privacy protection. Overall, the site is vulnerable to trust and security concerns until technical and policy issues are resolved.

Recommendations

  1. Resolve the server-side error causing the HTTP 500 and JavaScript null reference to restore site functionality.
  2. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with GDPR compliance considerations.
  3. Add clear contact information including company emails and phone numbers to improve business credibility.
  4. Enable DNSSEC and configure standard security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, etc.) to enhance security posture.
  5. Ensure HTTPS is properly configured and enforced site-wide to protect user data and improve trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Stack
Nuxt.js, Typekit Fonts, Supabase, Stripe, Microsoft Clarity
Frameworks
Nuxt.js
Platforms
Supabase
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
30/100

Analytics and tracking

Services
Microsoft Clarity, Facebook Pixel
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Microsoft Clarity, Facebook Pixel
Marketing tools
Microsoft Clarity
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is currently inaccessible due to a server-side error (HTTP 500).
  2. No visible business or contact information on the site.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  4. Site uses modern JavaScript framework Nuxt.js but is broken.
  5. Tracking scripts for Microsoft Clarity and Facebook Pixel are present.
  6. Domain is newly registered in 2023 with GoDaddy registrar and no DNSSEC.
  7. No security headers or HTTPS enforcement details found in the HTML content.
  8. No forms or user input fields detected on the page.
  9. No social media links or company emails found in the content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using Nuxt.js, a modern Vue.js framework, and integrates with Supabase for backend services and Stripe for payment processing. Fonts are loaded via Adobe Typekit. Analytics and tracking are implemented using Microsoft Clarity and Facebook Pixel. The site is hosted with DNS managed by NS1 and domain registered via GoDaddy. The current server-side error indicates a critical backend issue that prevents content delivery. The site shows basic mobile responsiveness but lacks accessibility and SEO optimizations. No CMS is detected. Performance is moderate but cannot be fully assessed due to error state.
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 walldman.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 walldman.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.