Skip to main content

Security report for xn--sr8hvo.ws

schmarty · Technology · N/a

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

Security score

53/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website 'An IndieWeb Webring' is a small community-driven project aimed at connecting personal websites that implement IndieWeb building blocks. It provides a directory, random site navigation, and membership sign-in via IndieAuth or RelMeAuth, targeting IndieWeb enthusiasts. The project is open source with active maintenance and blog updates, positioning itself as a niche community resource within the IndieWeb ecosystem. Technically, the site uses standard web technologies including HTML5, CSS, JavaScript, and PHP, with no detected CMS. The site is moderately performant and mobile-optimized, though accessibility and SEO are basic. Security practices include CSRF protection on forms but lack advanced HTTP security headers. The domain is privacy protected but consistent with the project's age and scope. Security posture is moderate with no critical vulnerabilities detected, but improvements are recommended in HTTPS enforcement, security headers, and explicit privacy and cookie policies. No advertising or tracking is present, supporting user privacy. Overall, the site is trustworthy and safe for general audiences. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security headers, implementing cookie consent, publishing a privacy policy with GDPR compliance, and improving contact transparency to strengthen trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 100 · Medium
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 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 xn--sr8hvo.ws

This scan found 24 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
72
Security headers
20
Email security
60
DNS health
75
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
50
Average
53

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 project operates as a community-focused open source initiative serving the IndieWeb community. Its business model is non-commercial, relying on voluntary participation and opt-in membership. The target audience is technically savvy personal website owners interested in decentralized web identity and connectivity. The project maintains transparency through open source code and active blog communication. Growth indicators include regular updates and feature enhancements. Partnerships are informal within the IndieWeb ecosystem. The project’s niche positioning limits commercial scale but fosters strong community engagement.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with basic protections such as CSRF tokens on forms. However, it lacks critical security headers like Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options, which could mitigate common web attacks. The absence of explicit HTTPS confirmation in the data is a concern, though likely present given modern hosting. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are published, limiting transparency. Data protection practices are minimal, with no cookie consent or privacy policy details addressing GDPR. The security culture appears informal but aware, suitable for a small community project but requiring enhancements for broader trust.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce HTTPS with strong TLS configuration and verify SSL certificate validity.
  2. Add essential security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie consent mechanism to improve GDPR compliance.
  4. Provide clear contact information including security and abuse contacts to enhance incident response readiness.
  5. Regularly audit and update dependencies and frameworks to mitigate vulnerabilities and technical debt.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
schmarty
Description
A proof-of-concept webring to connect personal websites implementing IndieWeb building blocks, enabling discovery and community among IndieWeb participants.
Key services
Webring directory, Random site navigation, IndieAuth/RelMeAuth sign-in for membership
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS, JavaScript, PHP
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
60/100
Good practices seen
  • CSRF token in login form

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

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 niche community project focused on IndieWeb webring functionality.
  2. Content is well structured with clear navigation and active blog updates.
  3. No privacy or cookie policy explicitly found except a terms page with some FAQ.
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers publicly listed; sign-in form uses CSRF token indicating some security awareness.
  5. No advertising or tracking detected.
  6. No explicit security headers or advanced security policies visible.
  7. Domain WHOIS is privacy protected but consistent with project age and scope.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with standard web technologies (HTML5, CSS, JavaScript, PHP) without a detected CMS, indicating a custom or lightweight implementation. The site is moderately performant and mobile-friendly but has room for improvement in accessibility and SEO. Hosting references suggest Glitch.com historically, but current hosting is not explicitly identified. The codebase includes CSRF protection on forms, indicating some security awareness. No advanced frameworks or platforms detected. Technical debt appears low but modernization opportunities exist in security headers and privacy 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 xn--sr8hvo.ws. 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 xn--sr8hvo.ws.

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.