Skip to main content

Security report for webdsl.org

Programming Language Group at Delft University of Technology · Technology · Netherlands

Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

WebDSL is an academic project developed by the Programming Language Group at Delft University of Technology, providing a domain-specific language for modeling web applications with a rich data model. The website serves as a documentation hub with tutorials, references, and source code links, targeting developers and researchers interested in domain-specific languages and web application modeling. The project is positioned as a niche academic tool with a small but focused audience. Technically, the site is built using MkDocs with the Material theme, hosted likely on GitHub Pages, and employs modern web standards including HTTPS and responsive design. Security posture is generally good with HTTPS enforced and no exposed sensitive data, but lacks DNSSEC and security headers which could enhance protection. Privacy compliance is minimal with no visible privacy or cookie policies and no contact information for incident response or data protection officers. Overall, the site is trustworthy and professional for its academic purpose but could improve compliance and security transparency.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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

9 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 webdsl.org

This scan found 26 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. 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
72
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
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

The WebDSL project operates as an open-source academic initiative with no commercial business model evident. Its market positioning is niche within the domain-specific language and web application modeling community. The project benefits from academic credibility and a GitHub presence with moderate community engagement. Revenue streams or partnerships are not evident. The target customers are developers and researchers seeking specialized language tools. Growth indicators are limited to academic activity and repository updates. The partnership ecosystem is minimal, primarily linking to GitHub and academic institutions. Strategic observations suggest maintaining academic openness while enhancing compliance and security transparency could improve trust and adoption.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enabled and no visible vulnerabilities or sensitive data exposure. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security represents gaps that could be exploited. There is no published security policy or incident response contact information, which limits readiness for security incidents. Compliance with GDPR and other data protection regulations is not evident due to missing privacy and cookie policies. The lack of forms reduces attack surface but also limits user engagement. Overall, the security posture is adequate for an academic documentation site but would benefit from enhanced security controls and compliance documentation.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy to improve GDPR compliance.
  3. Add standard security headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, Strict-Transport-Security) to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  4. Provide clear contact information for security incident reporting and data protection officer if applicable.
  5. Regularly review and update the GitHub repository and documentation to maintain community engagement and trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Programming Language Group at Delft University of Technology
Description
WebDSL is a domain-specific language for modeling web applications with a rich data model, developed and maintained by the Programming Language Group at Delft University of Technology.
Key services
Domain-specific language for web application development, Documentation and tutorials, Source code repository on GitHub
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, Google Fonts (Roboto, JetBrains Mono), MkDocs, MkDocs Material theme
Frameworks
MkDocs Material
Performance
fast
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced (implied by canonical URL https://)
  • No forms collecting sensitive data
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

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 well-structured documentation site for an academic domain-specific language project.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found, which is common for academic projects but may affect compliance.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly provided on the site.
  4. No forms collecting user data are present.
  5. Site uses HTTPS and modern static site generation technologies.
  6. No advertising or tracking technologies detected.
  7. No security headers detected in the HTML content; DNSSEC not enabled.
  8. GitHub repository link is prominently provided with moderate community engagement (54 stars, 8 forks).
Technical notes

Notes

The website is a static documentation site generated with MkDocs and styled with the Material theme, leveraging modern web technologies including HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript. It uses Google Fonts for typography and is likely hosted on GitHub Pages, as indicated by the canonical URL and GitHub repository link. Performance is fast with good mobile optimization and accessibility features. The site lacks dynamic content or user data collection forms, reducing complexity and security risks. However, the absence of security headers and DNSSEC indicates areas for technical improvement. The site’s SEO is supported by proper meta tags and Open Graph data. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid for a documentation site but could be enhanced with additional security and compliance features.
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 webdsl.org. 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 webdsl.org.

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.