Skip to main content

Security report for writefreely.org

WriteFreely · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

63/100

Risk levelMedium

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

WriteFreely is an open source, minimalist blogging platform designed for self-hosting and federation via ActivityPub. It targets writers and communities seeking a distraction-free writing environment and decentralized social web integration. The platform is mature and stable, powering over half a million blogs, and offers both downloadable software and managed hosting services. Technically, the site uses Go for backend, with JavaScript and CSS for frontend, hosted on 1984 Hosting infrastructure. However, the website lacks a valid SSL certificate and does not serve content over HTTPS, which is a critical security concern. The site also lacks privacy and cookie policies, and no contact emails or phone numbers are explicitly provided. Analytics are implemented via Matomo, but no consent mechanism is evident. Overall, the site is functional and professional in design but requires urgent security improvements to protect users and enhance trust.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of writefreely.org. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 100 · Critical
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

8 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 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';…

  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

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

Keep watching writefreely.org

This scan found 19 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
85
Security headers
15
Email security
65
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
63

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

WriteFreely occupies a niche in the blogging and federated social platform market, leveraging open source principles and a lightweight technical stack. Its competitive advantage lies in simplicity, federation support, and a strong community ecosystem. The business model combines free software distribution with optional managed hosting, targeting individual writers and communities. The presence of related domains like Write.as and Musing Studio indicates a small but focused partnership ecosystem. Growth potential is supported by the platform's decade-long maturity and active developer engagement. However, the lack of visible privacy and security policies may limit enterprise adoption.

Security posture

The security posture of WriteFreely.org is weak due to the absence of HTTPS and valid SSL certificates, exposing users to potential interception and man-in-the-middle attacks. No security headers or HSTS policies are implemented, and OCSP stapling is disabled. The site does not provide documented security policies or incident response contacts, which limits transparency and preparedness. While no known vulnerabilities or malware are detected, the lack of basic security controls significantly increases risk. Compliance with GDPR and other privacy regulations is questionable given the absence of privacy and cookie policies. Incident response readiness and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are not evident.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS site-wide immediately.
  2. Implement security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to harden the site.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with GDPR compliance details and implement a cookie consent mechanism.
  4. Provide clear contact information including security incident response and abuse contacts.
  5. Enable HSTS with includeSubDomains and preload options, and configure OCSP stapling and session resumption for improved security and performance.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a custom open source CMS written in Go, with frontend assets served from a CDN. Hosting is provided by 1984 Hosting, as indicated by DNS NS records. The site loads slowly (5.3 seconds) with moderate resource count and page size. Mobile optimization is good, but accessibility features are basic. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and Open Graph data. No modern TLS protocols are enabled, and no security headers are present. Analytics are implemented via Matomo, but without visible privacy controls. The technical stack is modern and lightweight but requires security hardening and performance optimization.
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. 61/100Medium32 findingsView report
  2. 61/100Medium32 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with writefreely.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 writefreely.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.