Skip to main content

Is cudis.io a Scam? Security Check Results - cudis.io Reviews

C

Is cudis.io Safe? Security Analysis for cudis.io

Check if cudis.io is a scam or legitimate. Free security scan and reviews.

OtherUnited Statessmall
JavaScript
Analyzed 9/6/2025Completed 3:10:02 AM
52
Security Score
MEDIUM RISK

AI Summary

The website at cudis.io/lander is currently a minimal placeholder or parking page with very limited content and no visible business information. The domain is newly registered in March 2024 with privacy protection, which limits transparency about the registrant. The site includes a Google AdSense script indicating some intent for monetization but lacks any privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies, as well as contact information or social media presence. Technically, the site uses basic JavaScript and is hosted via GoDaddy's domain control name servers. Security configurations are minimal with no DNSSEC enabled and no security headers detected. Overall, the site has a low trust and credibility score due to its minimal content and lack of transparency.

Detected Technologies

JavaScript

🧠AI Business Intelligence

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

Business Intelligence

Market & Strategic Analysis

Due to the lack of business information on the site and privacy-protected WHOIS data, it is not possible to determine the company's market positioning, business model, or target audience. The domain's recent registration suggests the business is either very new or the site is not yet fully developed. There are no indications of partnerships, certifications, or industry focus. The presence of Google AdSense suggests a possible advertising revenue model, but no further business intelligence can be derived.

Security Posture Analysis

Comprehensive Security Assessment

The security posture of the website is basic and lacks several best practices. The domain does not have DNSSEC enabled, and no security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or Strict-Transport-Security are present. The site uses HTTPS but no detailed SSL configuration data is available. There are no visible forms or inputs, reducing attack surface, but also no incident response or security policy information is provided. The use of privacy protection in WHOIS is common but reduces transparency. Overall, the security maturity is low with room for significant improvement.

Strategic Recommendations

Priority Actions for Security Improvement

1

Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS security and prevent spoofing.

Observations

AI-powered comprehensive website and business analysis.

AI-Enhanced Website Analysis

Business Insights

Content Quality:

poor

Branding:

inconsistent

Technical Stack

Technologies:
JavaScript
Performance:

moderate

Mobile:

basic

Accessibility:

basic

SEO:

poor

Security Assessment

Security Score:
30/100

Analytics & Tracking

Tracking Level:minimal
Privacy Compliance:poor

Advertising & Marketing

Ad Networks:
Google AdSense
Transparency Level:basic

Website Quality Assessment

Design Quality:poor
User Experience:poor
Content Relevance:poor
Navigation Clarity:poor
Professionalism:poor
Trustworthiness:low

Key Observations

1

Website content is minimal and appears to be a placeholder or parking page.

🛡️Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis and recommendations.

Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis

25/100
Score

Missing Strict-Transport-Security header

HIGH

Forces HTTPS connections

Missing X-Frame-Options header

HIGH

Prevents clickjacking attacks

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

40/100
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

Insufficient contact information

MEDIUM

GDPR requires organizations to provide clear contact details

GDPR Compliance Analysis

Privacy Policy0% confidence
Cookie Policy0% confidence

🛡️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: transport

📧Email Security

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

Email Security

SPF, DKIM, and DMARC validation

60/100
Score

No DKIM record found

MEDIUM

DKIM adds cryptographic signatures to emails

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

No email authentication configured

CRITICAL

Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

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

🏆SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis.

SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis

77/100
Score

Weak Protocols Supported

HIGH

Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

OCSP Stapling Not Enabled

LOW

OCSP stapling improves performance and privacy

Certificate Transparency Not Implemented

LOW

Certificate is not logged in Certificate Transparency logs

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 Disabled

📊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
1 years(established)
Expiry Risk
none(1287 days)
Protection Level
strongDNSSEC OFF
Suspicious Indicators Detected
  • Privacy/proxy registration detected

DNS Records

A Records:15.197.148.33, 3.33.130.190
Name Servers:
ns45.domaincontrol.com
ns46.domaincontrol.com
SOA:Serial: 2024031600, TTL: 600s

DNSSEC Status

DNSSEC Not Enabled

DNS Performance

Resolution Time:90ms

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 uses a minimal technical stack primarily consisting of JavaScript loaded from a parking-lander static resource. The hosting provider is GoDaddy, as indicated by the domain control name servers. The site lacks CMS or framework indicators and does not include SEO or accessibility enhancements. Performance is likely moderate given the minimal content, but mobile optimization and navigation clarity are basic at best. The absence of metadata, Open Graph tags, or structured data limits search engine visibility and social media integration. Overall, the technical implementation is minimal and would benefit from modernization and content development.
Analyze Another Website