Skip to main content

Security report for zirk.us

zirk.us · Technology · Germany

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

zirk.us operates as an independent Mastodon server focused on the arts and humanities community, providing a niche social networking platform within the fediverse. The website targets readers, writers, academics, and enthusiasts of literature, philosophy, film, music, culture, politics, history, and architecture. It positions itself as a community-driven platform emphasizing open conversation and cultural engagement. The domain is mature, registered since 2004, and hosted under GoDaddy.com, LLC with a registrant address in Germany, aligning with the website's language and content focus. Technically, the site runs Mastodon version 4.4.3, leveraging Ruby on Rails and React frameworks, with modern JavaScript module usage and SVG-based iconography. The site is mobile-optimized with good navigation and SEO practices, though performance is moderate. Hosting details beyond the registrar are not explicit. No CMS is detected, consistent with Mastodon's custom platform nature. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enforced and domain registration protections in place, but lacks security headers and DNSSEC. Privacy compliance is partial; a privacy policy exists but no cookie consent or terms of service pages are found. No incident response or security contact information is published. No advertising or tracking technologies are detected, indicating minimal user tracking. Overall, the site is safe, professional, and trustworthy for its target audience, but could improve privacy compliance and security hardening. The lack of explicit contact information and terms of service may impact user trust and legal compliance. Strategic improvements in security headers, cookie consent, and incident response transparency are recommended.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of zirk.us. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
58/ 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

4 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 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. 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
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 384-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching zirk.us

This scan found 20 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
70
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
58
Average
73

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention zirk.us, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
10
Employees
0
Customers
10
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
0%

1 subdomain affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for zirk.us.

Select it in the checkout above.

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

zirk.us serves a specialized market segment within the fediverse, focusing on arts and humanities communities. Its competitive advantage lies in its niche content and community focus rather than scale. The business model is community-driven social networking without evident monetization or advertising. The target customers are academics, writers, and cultural enthusiasts seeking an ad-free, algorithm-free social experience. Growth indicators include a moderate active user base (612 active users) and ongoing platform updates. The ecosystem includes open source Mastodon software and external content delivery via cdn.masto.host. No formal partnerships or subsidiaries are identified. The site maintains a consistent brand aligned with its cultural mission.

Security posture

The security maturity level is moderate. HTTPS is enforced, and domain registration includes prohibitive status flags to prevent unauthorized changes. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security reduces defense-in-depth. DNSSEC is not enabled, which could expose DNS spoofing risks. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the provided content. Privacy compliance gaps exist due to missing cookie consent and terms of service. Incident response readiness is unclear as no security contacts or policies are published. The security culture appears basic but could benefit from formalized policies and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Implement standard security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options) to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Enable DNSSEC for the domain to improve DNS integrity and security.
  3. Add a cookie consent mechanism to comply with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  4. Publish terms of service and a security policy including incident response contacts to improve transparency and user trust.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and dependencies to mitigate vulnerabilities.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
zirk.us
Description
Literature, philosophy, film, music, culture, politics, history, architecture: join the circus of the arts and humanities! For readers, writers, academics or anyone wanting to follow the conversation.
Key services
Mastodon social networking, Community engagement, Content sharing
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Mastodon 4.4.3, Ruby on Rails, React, JavaScript ES Modules, SVG icons, CSS with integrity hashes
Frameworks
Ruby on Rails, React
Platforms
Fediverse, Mastodon
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Domain status includes clientUpdateProhibited and clientTransferProhibited flags

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 Mastodon social network instance focused on arts and humanities
  2. No privacy or cookie consent banners detected despite GDPR relevance
  3. No terms of service page found
  4. No explicit contact emails or phone numbers found on the page
  5. Uses modern web technologies and up-to-date Mastodon version
  6. No security headers detected in provided data
  7. No advertising or tracking scripts detected
  8. Content is safe and suitable for general audiences
  9. Domain is well-registered and not privacy protected
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern technology stack centered on Mastodon 4.4.3, Ruby on Rails backend, and React frontend components. JavaScript modules and CSS assets are loaded with integrity hashes, indicating attention to resource integrity. The site is mobile-optimized and uses SVG icons for scalability. Performance is moderate, likely due to dynamic content loading and federated network interactions. No CMS is detected, consistent with Mastodon's architecture. Hosting provider details beyond domain registrar are not explicit. Accessibility features are basic but present. SEO is supported by meta tags and Open Graph data. Technical risks include missing security headers and lack of DNSSEC, which could be addressed to improve resilience.
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. 72/100 −1Medium28 findingsView report
  2. 73/100 −5Medium28 findingsView report
  3. 78/100Low22 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with zirk.us. 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 zirk.us.

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.