Skip to main content

Is omegaproxy.com a Scam? Security Check Results - Omegaproxy Reviews

omegaproxy.com favicon

Is omegaproxy.com Safe? Security Analysis for Omegaproxy

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

TechnologyN/amedium
JavaScriptVue.jsGoogle Tag ManagerBing UET
Analyzed 8/2/2025Completed 5:44:14 AM
58
Security Score
MEDIUM RISK

AI Summary

OmegaProxy operates as a premier residential proxy service provider offering over 90 million rotating residential IPs across 190 countries. The company targets businesses and professionals requiring reliable proxy solutions, including a proprietary extension supporting Proxy SwitchyOmega. The website is professionally designed using modern web technologies such as Vue.js and integrates marketing and analytics tools like Google Tag Manager and Bing UET. However, the absence of publicly available WHOIS registration data and lack of visible privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies indicate gaps in transparency and compliance. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS enabled but lacking comprehensive security headers and incident response contacts. Overall, OmegaProxy presents a functional and professional service platform but would benefit from enhanced compliance and transparency measures.

Detected Technologies

JavaScriptVue.jsGoogle Tag ManagerBing UET

🧠AI Business Intelligence

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

Business Intelligence

Market & Strategic Analysis

OmegaProxy positions itself strongly in the proxy services market with a large IP pool and global reach, catering to cross-border e-commerce, web crawling, and other proxy-dependent applications. The business model revolves around providing residential IPs and proxy management tools, targeting medium-sized enterprises and professional users. The website's integration of major analytics and advertising platforms suggests active marketing efforts. However, the lack of detailed company information, contact details, and WHOIS transparency may impact trust and customer confidence. No evident partnerships or subsidiaries were identified from the available data.

Extracted Contact Information

Marketing Intelligence Data

Email Addresses (2)

s*****@omegaproxy.com
b*****@omegaproxy.com

Security Posture Analysis

Comprehensive Security Assessment

The website employs HTTPS, ensuring encrypted communications, but lacks visible security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options, which are recommended for enhanced protection. No explicit security or incident response policies are published, and no dedicated security contact channels were found. The absence of privacy and cookie policies raises compliance concerns, particularly regarding GDPR. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analyzed content, but the incomplete WHOIS data and missing compliance documentation suggest areas for improvement in security governance and transparency.

Strategic Recommendations

Priority Actions for Security Improvement

1

Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance and user trust.

Observations

AI-powered comprehensive website and business analysis.

AI-Enhanced Website Analysis

Business Insights

Company:

Omegaproxy

Description:

Omegaproxy: Premier Residential Proxy Service with 90M+ IPs across 190 Countries, featuring Omegaproxy Extension Supporting Proxy SwitchyOmega. Caters to diverse proxy needs with professional solutions.

Key Services:
Residential proxiesRotating IPsProxy extension supporting SwitchyOmega
Content Quality:

good

Branding:

consistent

Technical Stack

Technologies:
JavaScriptVue.jsGoogle Tag ManagerBing UET
Frameworks:
Vue.js
Performance:

moderate

Mobile:

good

Accessibility:

basic

SEO:

good

Security Assessment

Security Score:
70/100
Best Practices:
  • HTTPS enabled

Analytics & Tracking

Services:
Google Tag ManagerBing UET
Tracking Level:moderate
Privacy Compliance:poor

Advertising & Marketing

Ad Networks:
Bing Ads
Tracking Pixels:
Bing UET
Marketing Tools:
Bing UET
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 accessible and not blocked by WAF or security challenges.

🛡️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

58/100
Score

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

Privacy policy may not be GDPR compliant

MEDIUM

Privacy policy lacks explicit GDPR compliance elements

GDPR Compliance Analysis

Privacy Policy85% confidence
Cookie Policy0% confidence
Contact Information Found90% confidence
emailphone

🛡️NIS2 Compliance

Network & Information Security Directive compliance assessment.

NIS2 Compliance

Network & Information Security Directive

17/100
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

📧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"

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.qiye.aliyun.com include:mxsspf.sendpulse.com -all
DNS Lookups:2/10
Policy:-all
DKIM Selectors Found
Selector:default(1416-bit rsa)
Selector:s1(1440-bit rsa)
DMARC Details
Policy:none
Aggregate Reports:abuse@omegaproxy.com
Forensic Reports:abuse@omegaproxy.com

🏆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 77 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

Domain Delete Lock Not Enabled

LOW

Domain can be deleted without additional verification

DMARC Policy Set to None

LOW

DMARC is configured but not enforcing any policy

Domain Registration Details

Domain Age
6 years(mature)
Expiry Risk
low(208 days)
Protection Level
basicDNSSEC OFF

DNS Records

A Records:104.21.80.1, 104.21.32.1, 104.21.112.1, 104.21.64.1, 104.21.48.1, 104.21.16.1, 104.21.96.1
Name Servers:
dorthy.ns.cloudflare.com
jay.ns.cloudflare.com
MX Records:
10: mxw.mxhichina.com
5: mxn.mxhichina.com
SOA:Serial: 2378756085, TTL: 1800s

DNSSEC Status

DNSSEC Not Enabled

DNS Performance

Resolution Time:72ms

SPF Analysis

SPF Record:
v=spf1 include:spf.qiye.aliyun.com include:mxsspf.sendpulse.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 a modern JavaScript framework (Vue.js) and uses asynchronous loading of analytics scripts from Google Tag Manager and Bing UET, indicating a contemporary technical infrastructure. Performance appears moderate with preloading of scripts and responsive design elements. Mobile optimization is good, and SEO meta tags are well implemented. However, the lack of detected CMS or hosting provider details limits full infrastructure assessment. Accessibility features are basic but present. Technical risks include missing security headers and incomplete compliance documentation, which could affect user trust and regulatory adherence.
Analyze Another Website