Skip to main content

Is jqw.com a Scam? Security Check Results - jqw.com Reviews

J

Is jqw.com Safe? Security Analysis for 欢迎来此游戏站95.216.242.762025/08/04 15:14:35

Check if jqw.com is a scam or legitimate. Free security scan and reviews.

OtherN/asmall
JavaScript
Analyzed 8/4/2025Completed 7:15:48 AM
39
Security Score
HIGH RISK

AI Summary

The website jqw.com appears to be a minimal gaming site primarily embedding an external iframe from a suspicious domain. The content is very limited, with no privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies present, and no contact or business information provided. The domain is longstanding, registered since 1999, but the website content does not reflect a mature or professional business presence. Technically, the site uses basic JavaScript and embeds external resources insecurely without HTTPS enforcement in scripts, which poses security risks. No security headers or compliance indicators are present, and the site lacks analytics or advertising transparency. Overall, the security posture is weak, with critical issues including insecure external calls and suspicious iframe embedding. The site is accessible without WAF or blocking mechanisms but scores low on trust and professionalism.

Detected Technologies

JavaScript

🧠AI Business Intelligence

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

Business Intelligence

Market & Strategic Analysis

The business behind jqw.com is unclear due to lack of contact information and business details. The site targets a general audience interested in gaming but offers no clear business model or services beyond embedding external content. The domain's age suggests it could have been established for a long time, but current content quality and trust indicators are poor. There is no evidence of partnerships or certifications. The site likely operates on a small scale or is abandoned, with no visible revenue streams or growth indicators.

Security Posture Analysis

Comprehensive Security Assessment

The security maturity level of jqw.com is low. The absence of HTTPS enforcement in scripts, lack of security headers, and embedding of an iframe from a suspicious external domain increase the risk of security vulnerabilities. There are no visible compliance measures for GDPR or incident response readiness. The site does not provide any security or privacy policies, nor does it offer contact channels for security incidents. These gaps expose the site and its users to potential threats and reduce trustworthiness.

Strategic Recommendations

Priority Actions for Security Improvement

1

Implement HTTPS site-wide and ensure all external calls use secure protocols.

Observations

AI-powered comprehensive website and business analysis.

AI-Enhanced Website Analysis

Business Insights

Description:

The website appears to be a gaming site with minimal content, primarily embedding an iframe from an external domain.

Key Services:
online gaming content via iframe embedding
Content Quality:

poor

Branding:

inconsistent

Technical Stack

Technologies:
JavaScript
Performance:

slow

Mobile:

basic

Accessibility:

poor

SEO:

poor

Security Assessment

Security Score:
20/100

Analytics & Tracking

Tracking Level:minimal
Privacy Compliance:poor

Advertising & Marketing

Transparency Level:poor

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 primarily an iframe embedding external content from a suspicious domain.

🛡️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

50/100
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

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

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

62/100
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

SSL Certificate Expires Soon

HIGH

SSL certificate expires in 10 days

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

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

Domain Delete Lock Not Enabled

LOW

Domain can be deleted without additional verification

No DMARC Record

MEDIUM

DMARC policy not configured

Domain Registration Details

Domain Age
25 years(mature)
Expiry Risk
none(3011 days)
Protection Level
basicDNSSEC OFF

DNS Records

A Records:23.225.7.195
Name Servers:
a.share-dns.com
b.share-dns.net
SOA:Serial: 1747702326, TTL: 600s

DNSSEC Status

DNSSEC Not Enabled

DNS Performance

Resolution Time:136ms

Network Security

Port scanning and network exposure analysis.

Network Security

Port scanning and network exposure analysis

20/100
Score

High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

HIGH

Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

Service Exposed: SSH

MEDIUM

Port 22 (SSH) is publicly accessible - SSH - Secure but can be brute-forced

🔧Technical Analysis

Detailed technical findings and analysis from AI assessment.

Technical Analysis

Comprehensive security assessment findings

Additional Findings

The website uses basic JavaScript for dynamic IP and time display and embeds an iframe from an external domain. There is no evidence of modern frameworks or CMS usage. The site lacks SEO optimization, accessibility features, and mobile responsiveness is basic. Performance is likely slow due to iframe embedding and lack of optimization. Hosting provider details are not explicit beyond the registrar information. The technical debt is high, and modernization is recommended to improve security, performance, and user experience.
Analyze Another Website