Skip to main content

Is h2.finance a Scam? Security Check Results - h2.finance Reviews

h2.finance favicon

Is h2.finance Safe? Security Analysis for H2 Finance

Check if h2.finance is a scam or legitimate. Free security scan and reviews.

OtherN/asmall
Google Tag ManagerGoogle AnalyticsSegment AnalyticsJavaScript ES Modules
Analyzed 9/5/2025Completed 8:12:18 PM
52
Security Score
MEDIUM RISK

AI Summary

H2 Finance presents a minimalistic website with very limited content, primarily consisting of a loading animation and basic metadata. The site title and description simply state "H2 Finance" without further elaboration on business activities, services, or market positioning. The technical infrastructure includes modern JavaScript modules and integration with Google Analytics and Segment for user tracking, indicating some level of digital maturity. However, the absence of visible business information, contact details, or compliance policies suggests a low level of transparency and professionalism. Security posture is basic with HTTPS enabled but lacking critical security headers and no visible forms or inputs to assess further security controls. The WHOIS data is unavailable or unsupported for this domain's TLD, limiting trust and making it difficult to verify ownership or legitimacy. Overall, the website appears to be in an early or placeholder state, with significant gaps in content, security, and compliance that should be addressed to improve trust and user confidence.

Detected Technologies

Google Tag ManagerGoogle AnalyticsSegment AnalyticsJavaScript ES Modules

🧠AI Business Intelligence

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

Business Intelligence

Market & Strategic Analysis

Due to the minimal content and lack of business details, it is not possible to determine H2 Finance's market positioning, competitive advantages, or revenue streams. The absence of contact information and policies suggests the site may not yet be fully operational or is under development. The use of Google Analytics and Segment indicates an intent to collect user data for marketing or product improvement. No partnerships or subsidiaries are identified. The business model and target audience remain unclear, and no growth indicators or strategic insights can be derived from the current data.

Security Posture Analysis

Comprehensive Security Assessment

The website employs HTTPS, which is a fundamental security requirement. However, it lacks essential security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security, which are critical for protecting against common web vulnerabilities. No forms or user inputs are present to evaluate input validation or secure data handling. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates non-compliance with GDPR and other data protection regulations. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is available, reducing transparency and preparedness. Overall, the security posture is weak and requires significant improvements to meet industry best practices and regulatory requirements.

Strategic Recommendations

Priority Actions for Security Improvement

1

Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to ensure compliance with GDPR and other regulations.

Observations

AI-powered comprehensive website and business analysis.

AI-Enhanced Website Analysis

Business Insights

Description:

H2 Finance

Content Quality:

basic

Branding:

moderate

Technical Stack

Technologies:
Google Tag ManagerGoogle AnalyticsSegment AnalyticsJavaScript ES Modules
Performance:

moderate

Mobile:

basic

Accessibility:

basic

SEO:

basic

Security Assessment

Security Score:
55/100
Best Practices:
  • HTTPS enabled

Analytics & Tracking

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

Advertising & Marketing

Tracking Pixels:
Segment Analytics
Marketing Tools:
Segment Analytics
Transparency Level:poor

Website Quality Assessment

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

Key Observations

1

Website content is minimal and mostly placeholder/loading animation

🛡️Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis and recommendations.

Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis

15/100
Score

Missing Strict-Transport-Security header

HIGH

Forces HTTPS connections

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, Google APIs

GDPR Compliance Analysis

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

🛡️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, digital

📧Email Security

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

Email Security

SPF, DKIM, and DMARC validation

75/100
Score

DMARC not enforcing

MEDIUM

DMARC policy is set to "none"

Strict DMARC Alignment

LOW

Strict alignment may cause legitimate emails to fail

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 v=spf1 include:_spf.google.com -all
DNS Lookups:2/10
Policy:~all
DKIM Selectors Found
Selector:google(1416-bit rsa)
DMARC Details
Policy:none
Aggregate Reports:h2.finance@rua.dmarcdkim.io
Forensic Reports:h2.finance@ruf.dmarcdkim.io

🏆SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis.

SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis

75/100
Score

SSL Certificate Expires Within 90 Days

MEDIUM

SSL certificate expires in 83 days

Weak SSL Key Length

HIGH

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

Partial SSL/TLS Assessment

LOW

Completed 2 of 4 security checks due to time constraints

Certificate Details

Subject:h2.finance
Issuer:WE1
Valid Until:11/28/2025 (83 days)
SANs:h2.finance, *.h2.finance

OCSP Status

OCSP Stapling Disabled

📊DNS Health

DNS configuration and security assessment.

DNS Health

DNS configuration and security assessment

70/100
Score

DNSSEC Not Enabled

MEDIUM

DNSSEC is not configured for this domain

CAA Records Not Configured

LOW

Certificate Authority Authorization (CAA) records not found

Invalid SPF Record

MEDIUM

SPF record syntax is invalid

DMARC Policy Set to None

LOW

DMARC is configured but not enforcing any policy

DNS Records

A Records:188.114.96.1, 188.114.97.1
AAAA Records:2606:4700:3035::6815:1a41, 2606:4700:3035::ac43:8795
Name Servers:
emma.ns.cloudflare.comDNS only
otto.ns.cloudflare.comDNS only
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: 2382275834, TTL: 1800s

DNSSEC Status

DNSSEC Not Enabled

DNS Performance

Resolution Time:38ms

SPF Analysis

SPF Record:
v=spf1 include:_spf.google.com -all 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 uses modern JavaScript ES modules and integrates Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, and Segment for analytics and tracking. The HTML structure is valid but minimal, with limited content and no visible forms or interactive elements. Performance is moderate given the lightweight content, but mobile optimization and accessibility are basic and could be improved. SEO optimization is minimal with only basic meta tags and Open Graph data present. Hosting provider and CMS are not identifiable from the available data. Overall, the technical implementation is functional but lacks depth and sophistication.
Analyze Another Website