Skip to main content

Is quan.ge a Scam? Security Check Results - quan.ge Reviews

quan.ge favicon

Is quan.ge Safe? Security Analysis for 权哥米表 - QUAN GE Domains for sale!

Check if quan.ge is a scam or legitimate. Free security scan and reviews.

OtherN/asmall
HTML5CSS3JavaScriptGoogle Fonts (Montserrat)Fontello Icons+1 more
Analyzed 8/2/2025Completed 7:30:29 PM
52
Security Score
MEDIUM RISK

AI Summary

The website quan.ge operates as a domain sales platform specializing in Chinese and English domain names, including personal names and branded domains. It targets domain buyers interested in acquiring these domains, operating a niche reseller business model. The site is relatively new, with the domain registered in late 2024, consistent with the business launch. The website presents a professional and consistent branding with a clean, responsive design and clear navigation, though it lacks comprehensive business and legal information such as privacy or cookie policies. Technically, the site uses modern web technologies including HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, Google Fonts, and Fontello icons. It employs Umami Analytics for minimal user tracking and is hosted with DNS services from Volcengine. The site is mobile optimized and performs moderately well, though accessibility features are basic and SEO optimization is minimal. No CMS or backend platform is detected, suggesting a static or custom-built site. From a security perspective, the site lacks visible security headers and published security policies. HTTPS usage is implied but not explicitly confirmed from the HTML content. No forms collect sensitive data, reducing immediate risk, but the absence of privacy, cookie, and incident response policies indicates compliance gaps. The WHOIS data is consistent with the website content and business model, showing no suspicious patterns. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be improved with standard best practices. The overall risk assessment indicates a functional and professional domain sales site with moderate trustworthiness but lacking in privacy and security policy transparency. Strategic recommendations include implementing HTTPS with strong SSL, publishing privacy and cookie policies, adding security headers, and providing incident response contact information to enhance compliance and trust.

Detected Technologies

HTML5CSS3JavaScriptGoogle Fonts (Montserrat)Fontello IconsUmami Analytics

🧠AI Business Intelligence

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

Business Intelligence

Market & Strategic Analysis

The business operates in the domain sales market, focusing on Chinese and English domain names, including personal and branded domains. Its competitive advantage lies in a curated portfolio of domains with Chinese cultural relevance and some English domains, targeting buyers interested in these niches. The business model is straightforward domain reselling, generating revenue from domain sales. The target customers are domain investors, businesses, and individuals seeking specific domain names. Growth indicators include a broad domain portfolio and partnerships with related domain sites. The partnership ecosystem includes several domain-related friendly link partners, enhancing market reach. The company appears small and newly founded in 2024, with no parent or subsidiary companies identified. Operations are primarily online with minimal marketing or advertising detected.

Extracted Contact Information

Marketing Intelligence Data

Email Addresses (1)

5*****@qq.com

Security Posture Analysis

Comprehensive Security Assessment

The website demonstrates a basic security maturity level. It uses HTTPS (assumed but not explicitly confirmed), employs minimal user tracking via Umami Analytics, and does not collect sensitive user data through forms. However, it lacks critical security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options, and no privacy or cookie policies are published, indicating compliance gaps with GDPR and other regulations. There is no visible incident response or vulnerability disclosure information, limiting transparency and readiness. The WHOIS data is consistent and shows no privacy protection or suspicious patterns. Overall, the security posture is moderate but requires improvements in policy transparency, security headers, and incident response readiness to reduce risk and enhance trust.

Strategic Recommendations

Priority Actions for Security Improvement

1

Implement and enforce HTTPS with a strong SSL/TLS configuration and verify it site-wide.

Observations

AI-powered comprehensive website and business analysis.

AI-Enhanced Website Analysis

Business Insights

Description:

Website offering domain names for sale, primarily Chinese and some English domain names, including personal names and branded domains.

Key Services:
Domain name sales
Content Quality:

good

Branding:

consistent

Technical Stack

Technologies:
HTML5CSS3JavaScriptGoogle Fonts (Montserrat)Fontello IconsUmami Analytics
Performance:

moderate

Mobile:

good

Accessibility:

basic

SEO:

basic

Security Assessment

Security Score:
50/100
Best Practices:
  • HTTPS usage implied but not confirmed from HTML content
  • No forms collecting sensitive data

Analytics & Tracking

Services:
Umami Analytics
Tracking Level:minimal
Privacy Compliance:poor

Advertising & Marketing

Transparency Level:poor

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 domain sales platform focused on Chinese and English domains.

🛡️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 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: 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.163.com -all
DNS Lookups:1/10
Policy:-all
DKIM Selectors Found
Selector:default(1296-bit rsa)
DMARC Details
Policy:quarantine
Aggregate Reports:dmarc_report@qiye.163.com
Forensic Reports:dmarc@qiye.163.com

🏆SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis.

SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis

67/100
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

Mixed Content Detected

MEDIUM

52 resources loaded over insecure HTTP

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

85/100
Score

DNSSEC Not Enabled

MEDIUM

DNSSEC is not configured for this domain

CAA Records Not Configured

LOW

Certificate Authority Authorization (CAA) records not found

DNS Records

A Records:154.222.26.18
Name Servers:
ns1.volcengine-dns.comDNS only
ns2.volcengine-dns.comDNS only
MX Records:
10: hzmx02.mxmail.netease.com
5: hzmx01.mxmail.netease.com
SOA:Serial: 2024112600, TTL: 300s

DNSSEC Status

DNSSEC Not Enabled

DNS Performance

Resolution Time:360ms

SPF Analysis

SPF Record:
v=spf1 include:spf.163.com -all

Network Security

Port scanning and network exposure analysis.

Network Security

Port scanning and network exposure analysis

40/100
Score

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 is built using modern front-end technologies including HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript, with Google Fonts and Fontello icons for styling and icons. It uses Umami Analytics for privacy-focused user tracking. The site is responsive and mobile optimized with a grid layout for domain listings. Hosting is supported by Volcengine DNS services. No CMS or backend platform is detected, indicating a likely static or custom-built site. Performance is moderate with no obvious technical debt or errors in the HTML content. SEO optimization is basic with minimal meta tags and no structured data or Open Graph tags. Accessibility features are basic but present. Opportunities exist to improve SEO, accessibility, and security configurations to enhance technical maturity.
Analyze Another Website