Skip to main content

Is carre.studio a Scam? Security Check Results - CARRE STUDIO Reviews

carre.studio favicon

Is carre.studio Safe? Security Analysis for CARRE STUDIO

Check if carre.studio is a scam or legitimate. Free security scan and reviews.

TechnologyN/asmall
Google FontsjQuery 3.5.1GSAP 3.11.4Lenis smooth scrollSplitType.js+1 more
Analyzed 8/3/2025Completed 3:35:28 AM
58
Security Score
MEDIUM RISK

AI Summary

CARRE STUDIO is a small web design and user experience portfolio site operated by Thomas Carré. The website showcases various projects and emphasizes creating websites focused on interaction and user experience to help companies grow. The site is positioned as a niche portfolio for a creative web designer, targeting businesses seeking professional website design services. The business model is service-oriented, relying on showcasing past work to attract clients. The website is professionally designed with consistent branding and good content quality, supported by social media presence and a contact email.

Detected Technologies

Google FontsjQuery 3.5.1GSAP 3.11.4Lenis smooth scrollSplitType.jsWebflow hosting

🧠AI Business Intelligence

Technology stack, business insights, and market analysis powered by AI.

Business Intelligence

Market & Strategic Analysis

The website targets companies and professionals looking for web design and UX services. It leverages a portfolio approach to demonstrate expertise and attract clients. The presence of multiple external partner domains suggests a network of collaborations or client projects. The business operates in the technology sector with a focus on creative digital services. The lack of detailed company registration or physical address indicates a small or sole proprietorship operation. The use of social media and video interviews indicates active marketing and engagement strategies.

Extracted Contact Information

Marketing Intelligence Data

Email Addresses (1)

h*****@carre.studio

Security Posture Analysis

Comprehensive Security Assessment

The website uses HTTPS and modern web technologies, indicating a good baseline security posture. However, the absence of security headers and lack of privacy and cookie policies highlight compliance gaps. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, which could be improved to enhance trust. The use of third-party scripts like Google Analytics and Tag Manager introduces moderate tracking but no evident vulnerabilities. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a portfolio site but could benefit from enhanced compliance and security best practices.

Strategic Recommendations

Priority Actions for Security Improvement

1

Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy with consent mechanisms to improve GDPR compliance.

Observations

AI-powered comprehensive website and business analysis.

AI-Enhanced Website Analysis

Business Insights

Company:

CARRE STUDIO

Description:

Temporary portfolio, I help your company grow by creating websites focused on interaction and user experience.

Key Services:
website creationinteraction designuser experience design
Content Quality:

good

Branding:

consistent

Technical Stack

Technologies:
Google FontsjQuery 3.5.1GSAP 3.11.4Lenis smooth scrollSplitType.jsWebflow hosting
Frameworks:
GSAP
Platforms:
Webflow
Performance:

fast

Mobile:

good

Accessibility:

basic

SEO:

good

Security Assessment

Security Score:
85/100
Best Practices:
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics & Tracking

Services:
Google Analytics
Tracking Level:moderate
Privacy Compliance:poor

Advertising & Marketing

Tracking Pixels:
Google Analytics (gtag.js)
Transparency Level:basic

Website Quality Assessment

Design Quality:good
User Experience:good
Content Relevance:good
Navigation Clarity:good
Professionalism:good
Trustworthiness:moderate

Key Observations

1

Website is a personal/portfolio site for a web designer named Thomas Carré.

🛡️Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis and recommendations.

Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis

30/100
Score

Missing X-Frame-Options header

HIGH

Prevents clickjacking attacks

Missing X-Content-Type-Options header

MEDIUM

Prevents MIME type sniffing

Missing Content-Security-Policy header

HIGH

Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

Missing X-XSS-Protection header

MEDIUM

Legacy XSS protection (deprecated but still recommended)

Missing Referrer-Policy header

LOW

Controls referrer information sent with requests

Missing Permissions-Policy header

MEDIUM

Controls browser features and APIs

Sensitive data may be cached

LOW

Cache-Control header should include "no-store" for sensitive pages

👤GDPR Compliance

Privacy and data protection assessment under GDPR regulations.

GDPR Compliance

Privacy and data protection assessment

35/100
Score

No Privacy Policy found

HIGH

GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

No Cookie Policy found

HIGH

GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

No Cookie Consent Banner found

HIGH

GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

Third-party services without privacy policy

HIGH

Detected services: Google Analytics, LinkedIn, YouTube, Cloudflare, Google APIs

GDPR Compliance Analysis

Privacy Policy0% confidence
Cookie Policy0% confidence
Contact Information Found90% confidence
emailphone

🛡️NIS2 Compliance

Network & Information Security Directive compliance assessment.

NIS2 Compliance

Network & Information Security Directive

2/100
Score

No information security framework found

HIGH

NIS2 requires documented cybersecurity and information security measures

No vulnerability disclosure policy

MEDIUM

NIS2 encourages coordinated vulnerability disclosure

No security policy documentation found

HIGH

NIS2 requires documented cybersecurity governance and risk management

No incident response procedures found

HIGH

NIS2 requires documented incident response and business continuity plans

No business continuity planning found

MEDIUM

NIS2 emphasizes operational resilience and business continuity

No security contact information

HIGH

NIS2 requires clear incident reporting channels

No vulnerability reporting mechanism

MEDIUM

Clear vulnerability reporting supports coordinated disclosure

No NIS2 reference found

LOW

Consider explicitly mentioning NIS2 compliance efforts

Critical sector without clear security compliance

HIGH

Detected sectors: energy, transport, digital

📧Email Security

SPF, DKIM, and DMARC validation and email security assessment.

Email Security

SPF, DKIM, and DMARC validation

85/100
Score

No BIMI Record

LOW

BIMI displays brand logos in email clients

No MTA-STS Policy

MEDIUM

MTA-STS enforces TLS for email delivery

No TLS-RPT Record

LOW

TLS-RPT provides reporting for email TLS issues

SPF
Sender Policy Framework
DKIM
DomainKeys Identified Mail
DMARC
Domain-based Message Authentication
MX Records
Mail Exchange Records
BIMI
Brand Indicators
MTA-STS
Mail Transfer Agent Security
TLS-RPT
TLS Reporting
DNSSEC
DNS Security
SPF Details
Record:
v=spf1 include:_spf.google.com ~all
DNS Lookups:1/10
Policy:~all
DKIM Selectors Found
Selector:google(1096-bit rsa)

🏆SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis.

SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis

57/100
Score

Weak Protocols Supported

HIGH

Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

Certificate Transparency Not Implemented

LOW

Certificate is not logged in Certificate Transparency logs

SSL Certificate Expires Within 90 Days

MEDIUM

SSL certificate expires in 71 days

Weak SSL Key Length

HIGH

SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

Partial SSL/TLS Assessment

LOW

Completed 3 of 4 security checks due to time constraints

Protocol Support

TLSv1.3TLSv1.2TLSv1.1

OCSP Status

OCSP Stapling Enabled

📊DNS Health

DNS configuration and security assessment.

DNS Health

DNS configuration and security assessment

75/100
Score

DNSSEC Not Enabled

MEDIUM

DNSSEC is not configured for this domain

CAA Records Not Configured

LOW

Certificate Authority Authorization (CAA) records not found

No DMARC Record

MEDIUM

DMARC policy not configured

Domain Registration Details

Domain Age
2 years(established)
Expiry Risk
low(275 days)
Protection Level
moderateDNSSEC OFF

DNS Records

A Records:75.2.70.75, 99.83.190.102
Name Servers:
ns-cloud-a1.googledomains.com
ns-cloud-a2.googledomains.com
ns-cloud-a3.googledomains.com
ns-cloud-a4.googledomains.com
MX Records:
1: aspmx.l.google.com
5: alt1.aspmx.l.google.com
5: alt2.aspmx.l.google.com
10: alt3.aspmx.l.google.com
10: alt4.aspmx.l.google.com
SOA:Serial: 7, TTL: 300s

DNSSEC Status

DNSSEC Not Enabled

DNS Performance

Resolution Time:217ms

SPF Analysis

SPF Record:
v=spf1 include:_spf.google.com ~all

Network Security

Port scanning and network exposure analysis.

Network Security

Port scanning and network exposure analysis

100/100
Score

Good Network Security Posture

LOW

No unnecessary services detected on common risky ports

🔧Technical Analysis

Detailed technical findings and analysis from AI assessment.

Technical Analysis

Comprehensive security assessment findings

Additional Findings

The website is built on Webflow platform using modern JavaScript libraries including GSAP for animations, Lenis for smooth scrolling, and SplitType for text effects. It uses Google Fonts and is hosted on Webflow's CDN, ensuring fast loading times and good mobile optimization. The HTML is valid and SEO meta tags are well implemented. Accessibility is basic but could be improved. No CMS beyond Webflow is detected. The technical infrastructure is modern and well maintained, suitable for a portfolio site. Opportunities exist to enhance accessibility and security headers.
Analyze Another Website