Skip to main content

Security report for web.dev

web.dev · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, Email security and 1 other check.

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

web.dev is a comprehensive educational platform owned and operated by Google LLC, aimed at helping web developers build modern, accessible, fast, and secure websites. The site offers a wide range of resources including tutorials, courses, blog updates, and tools related to web technologies such as HTML, CSS, JavaScript, performance optimization, accessibility, and progressive web apps. It is positioned as an authoritative resource backed by the Chrome team, targeting developers and learners globally. The platform demonstrates a high level of digital maturity with a modern tech stack, excellent mobile optimization, and strong SEO and accessibility features. Security posture is robust with HTTPS enforcement and security headers, although explicit security policies and incident response contacts are not published. Privacy compliance is strong, leveraging Google's comprehensive privacy and cookie policies. Overall, web.dev is a highly professional, trustworthy, and valuable resource in the web development ecosystem.

Scanned

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

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 100 · Low
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

5 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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

  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"

    • High

      No DMARC record found

      DMARC provides email authentication and reporting

      What to do: Add DMARC record: "v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@yourdomain.com"

  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
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching web.dev

This scan found 17 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
52
Security headers
60
Email security
45
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
Average
73

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 website serves as a strategic educational and resource hub for web developers, leveraging Google's brand and technical expertise. Its business model focuses on content delivery and developer engagement rather than direct monetization. The platform supports Google's broader ecosystem by promoting best practices and adoption of modern web standards, indirectly benefiting Google's browser and cloud services. The site maintains strong partnerships with related Google properties such as developer.chrome.com and the Chromium blog. Its target audience includes professional developers, educators, and learners seeking authoritative guidance. The platform's consistent branding, high-quality content, and integration with Google's infrastructure position it as a market leader in web development education.

Security posture

web.dev exhibits a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, comprehensive security headers, and no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data. The site uses Google Tag Manager and Analytics responsibly with clear privacy policies. However, it lacks publicly available security policies, incident response procedures, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms, which are recommended best practices for transparency and rapid incident handling. The absence of direct contact channels for security issues slightly reduces its security maturity score but does not indicate immediate risk. Overall, the site is secure, well-maintained, and follows industry best practices.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and commitments.
  2. Implement and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.
  3. Provide clear contact information for security incidents or abuse reports.
  4. Regularly review and update third-party scripts and dependencies to mitigate supply chain risks.
  5. Enhance transparency around data retention policies related to analytics and user data.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Google LLC
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
web.dev
Description
We want to help you build beautiful, accessible, fast, and secure websites that work cross-browser, and for all of your users. This site is our home for content to help you on that journey, written by members of the Chrome team, and external experts.
Key services
Web development guidance, Educational courses on HTML, CSS, JavaScript, performance, accessibility, Latest news and blog updates, Tools and resources like PageSpeed Insights
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, Google Fonts, Google Tag Manager, Progressive Web App (manifest.json), Material Icons, Google Analytics, JSON-LD structured data
Frameworks
Devsite (Google internal framework)
Platforms
Google Cloud Hosting
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
excellent
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of security headers
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure cookie consent mechanism
  • No vulnerable or outdated libraries detected

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
good

Site quality

Design
excellent
User experience
excellent
Content relevance
excellent
Navigation
excellent
Professionalism
excellent
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is a Google-owned educational platform for web developers.
  2. Content is comprehensive and well-structured with multiple learning resources.
  3. Strong use of modern web technologies and best practices.
  4. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on the site.
  5. Privacy and cookie policies link to Google's official policy pages.
  6. No explicit security policy or incident response contact information found.
  7. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file detected.
  8. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
  9. Social media presence is linked to official Google/Chromium channels.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern, scalable infrastructure hosted on Google Cloud Platform, utilizing Google's internal Devsite framework. It employs best practices in web performance, accessibility, and SEO, including responsive design, structured data, and optimized asset delivery. The use of Google Fonts, Material Icons, and PWA manifest indicates a focus on user experience and progressive enhancement. Analytics and tag management are implemented via Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics, ensuring robust data collection for continuous improvement. The technical implementation is solid with no detected technical debt or deprecated technologies, positioning the site well for future scalability and feature expansion.
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. 74/100Medium24 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with web.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 web.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.