Skip to main content

Security report for xbetshop.com

Become a betting agent | How to start earning with 1xBet · Media · N/A

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

67/100

Risk levelMedium

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

xbetshop.com operates as an agent platform for the bookmaker 1xBet, targeting individuals interested in becoming betting brokers. The website promotes building an agent network to earn commissions with zero commission withdrawal for players. The business model focuses on affiliate and agent brokerage within the online betting industry. Technically, the site is built on the Nuxt.js framework, leveraging Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, and Yandex Metrika for tracking and analytics. Hosting is managed via Cloudflare DNS and CDN services, providing fast performance and basic mobile optimization. Security posture shows strengths in enforcing strict transport security (HSTS) with preload and subdomain inclusion, but lacks modern TLS protocol support and advanced security headers such as CSP. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies are present, nor is there visible contact or incident response information, indicating gaps in compliance and transparency. Overall, the site demonstrates moderate trustworthiness but requires improvements in security and compliance documentation to enhance user confidence and regulatory adherence.

Scanned

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. 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 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

    • 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 xbetshop.com

This scan found 18 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
30
Email security
75
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
67

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 platform positions itself as a niche agent network facilitator for 1xBet, a known bookmaker. Its competitive advantage lies in offering zero commission withdrawals and profit sharing for agents, appealing to individuals seeking income through betting brokerage. The business model is commission-based with a focus on network growth. The target audience is geographically broad, supported by extensive hreflang tags for multiple languages, indicating an international reach. Revenue streams likely derive from agent commissions and brokerage fees. The absence of detailed company information and certifications suggests a small-sized operation with limited public corporate disclosures. The partnership ecosystem is implied through affiliation with 1xBet but lacks explicit partner domain references. Growth indicators are not visible on the site, and the content quality is basic, focusing on conversion rather than detailed information.

Security posture

Security maturity is moderate with implementation of HSTS and secure cookie attributes, reducing risks of man-in-the-middle attacks and cookie theft. However, the lack of support for TLS 1.2 or TLS 1.3 protocols is a significant vulnerability, exposing users to weaker encryption standards or fallback risks. Absence of Content Security Policy and other security headers increases exposure to cross-site scripting and related attacks. No published privacy or cookie policies and no incident response or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms indicate compliance gaps, particularly with GDPR and other data protection regulations. The site does not provide contact channels for security incidents, limiting incident response readiness. Overall, the security culture appears immature, with room for improvement in transparency, protocol modernization, and policy publication.

Recommendations

  1. Enable and enforce TLS 1.2 or TLS 1.3 protocols to improve encryption security.
  2. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with user consent mechanisms to comply with GDPR.
  3. Implement Content Security Policy and other security headers to mitigate XSS and related attacks.
  4. Create and publicize an incident response policy and contact channels for security issues.
  5. Add a security.txt file and vulnerability disclosure program to encourage responsible reporting.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Nuxt.js, a modern Vue.js framework, indicating a contemporary front-end technology stack. It uses Google Tag Manager for marketing and analytics integration, along with Google Analytics and Yandex Metrika for user behavior tracking. Hosting and DNS are managed via Cloudflare, providing CDN and DNS resilience. Performance metrics indicate fast load times, though no detailed resource or page size data is available. Mobile optimization and accessibility are basic, with room for enhancement. SEO is supported by extensive hreflang tags for internationalization and meta description tags. The lack of CMS identification suggests a custom or headless approach. Technical risks include outdated SSL/TLS protocol support and missing security headers, which could impact user trust and compliance.
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 xbetshop.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 xbetshop.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.