Skip to main content

Security report for yimg.com

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Email security and 1 other check.

Security score

70/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The domain yimg.com is a long-established domain registered since 1997 with MarkMonitor Inc., a reputable registrar. However, the website content is completely minimal, consisting only of a blank page with no metadata, scripts, or business information. This indicates the site is either a placeholder or used for backend purposes rather than direct customer engagement. The lack of privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies and absence of contact information limits the ability to assess business operations or compliance. Technically, the site shows no advanced frameworks or technologies and lacks security headers or DNSSEC, though the domain registration status is secure with multiple prohibitions against unauthorized changes. Overall, the website is accessible without WAF or blocking mechanisms but provides no meaningful content or user engagement features.

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

6 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  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"

  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

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

Keep watching yimg.com

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
52
Security headers
75
Email security
50
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
70

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

Due to the absence of any business-related content, no insights into market positioning, business model, or services can be derived. The domain appears to be maintained by a large organization (likely Yahoo or related entities given the name servers) but serves no public-facing content at this URL. There are no indications of partnerships, subsidiaries, or revenue streams from the site itself. The domain's longevity suggests it is an important asset, possibly used for content delivery or backend services rather than direct business operations.

Security posture

The security posture is minimal with no visible security headers or DNSSEC enabled. The domain registration is well-protected with multiple status flags preventing unauthorized transfers or deletions. SSL configuration details are not provided but assumed basic. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data are visible due to the lack of content. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates compliance gaps. Incident response and security contact information are not present, limiting readiness for security events.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC to enhance domain name system security.
  2. Implement and publish privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  3. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to improve security posture.
  4. Provide clear contact and incident response information to support security and compliance transparency.
  5. Develop meaningful website content or redirect to active business pages to improve user experience and business credibility.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Performance
moderate
Mobile
poor
Accessibility
poor
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
30/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website content is minimal and consists of a blank page with a comment indicating intentional blankness.
  2. No metadata, scripts, forms, or external links present in the HTML content.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  4. No contact information or social media links available.
  5. No security headers or advanced technical configurations detected.
  6. Domain is well-registered and maintained but website lacks content and business information.
  7. No advertising or analytics technologies detected.
  8. No indications of adult or unsafe content.
  9. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website consists of a minimal HTML page with no metadata, scripts, or external resources. No CMS or frameworks are detected. The domain uses Yahoo name servers, indicating hosting or DNS management by Yahoo or related entities. Performance and mobile optimization cannot be assessed due to lack of content. The absence of SEO metadata and accessibility features indicates technical immaturity for a public-facing site. The domain registration is stable and secure but the website itself is effectively a placeholder.
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. 70/100Medium26 findingsView report
  2. 70/100 −4Medium26 findingsView report
  3. 74/100Medium21 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with yimg.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 yimg.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.