Skip to main content

Is shima.capital a Scam? Security Check Results - Shima Capital Reviews

shima.capital favicon

Is shima.capital Safe? Security Analysis for Shima Capital

Check if shima.capital is a scam or legitimate. Free security scan and reviews.

FinanceN/asmall
jQueryGoogle Tag ManagerNuxt.js (implied by _nuxt scripts)Ant Design (CSS classes and components)
Analyzed 9/6/2025Completed 11:13:13 AM
46
Security Score
HIGH RISK

AI Summary

Shima Capital appears to be a financial or investment-related entity based on its domain and website title. The website is built using modern web technologies including Nuxt.js and Ant Design, with analytics implemented via Google Tag Manager. However, the site lacks visible business descriptions, contact information, and compliance policies, which limits transparency and user trust. The WHOIS data is privacy-protected, providing no public registrant details or domain age information, which is common but reduces legitimacy signals. Security posture is basic with no detected security headers and no visible forms or sensitive data exposure. Overall, the site is accessible and functional but lacks critical trust and compliance elements.

Detected Technologies

jQueryGoogle Tag ManagerNuxt.js (implied by _nuxt scripts)Ant Design (CSS classes and components)

🧠AI Business Intelligence

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

Business Intelligence

Market & Strategic Analysis

The business model likely revolves around capital management or investment services targeting investors or financial clients. The lack of detailed business content, contact details, or certifications limits the ability to assess market position or competitive advantages. The use of privacy protection in WHOIS is typical in finance but should be balanced with transparency. The site uses Google Tag Manager for analytics, indicating some level of marketing and user tracking. No partnerships or subsidiaries are evident from the site content.

Security Posture Analysis

Comprehensive Security Assessment

The security maturity level is low to moderate. HTTPS is assumed but not explicitly confirmed in the data. No security headers were detected, and no incident response or security policy information is provided. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates compliance gaps, particularly with GDPR. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found in the provided content. The site would benefit from implementing security best practices such as security headers, documented incident response, and privacy compliance measures.

Strategic Recommendations

Priority Actions for Security Improvement

1

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

Observations

AI-powered comprehensive website and business analysis.

AI-Enhanced Website Analysis

Business Insights

Company:

Shima Capital

Description:

No explicit business description found in the provided HTML content. The site appears to be related to investment or capital management based on the domain and title.

Content Quality:

basic

Branding:

moderate

Technical Stack

Technologies:
jQueryGoogle Tag ManagerNuxt.js (implied by _nuxt scripts)Ant Design (CSS classes and components)
Frameworks:
Nuxt.jsAnt Design
Performance:

moderate

Mobile:

basic

Accessibility:

basic

SEO:

basic

Security Assessment

Security Score:
40/100

Analytics & Tracking

Services:
Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager)
Tracking Level:moderate
Privacy Compliance:poor

Advertising & Marketing

Transparency Level:basic

Website Quality Assessment

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

Key Observations

1

WHOIS data is unavailable due to privacy protection.

🛡️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

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: energy, transport, banking, 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.google.com ~all
DNS Lookups:1/10
Policy:~all
DKIM Selectors Found
Selector:google(1096-bit rsa)

🏆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 Within 90 Days

MEDIUM

SSL certificate expires in 59 days

Mixed Content Detected

MEDIUM

1 resources loaded over insecure HTTP

Partial SSL/TLS Assessment

LOW

Completed 3 of 4 security checks due to time constraints

Protocol Support

TLSv1.2TLSv1.3TLSv1.1

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

DNS Records

A Records:3.224.46.19
Name Servers:
ns-cloud-b1.googledomains.comDNS only
ns-cloud-b2.googledomains.comDNS only
ns-cloud-b3.googledomains.comDNS only
ns-cloud-b4.googledomains.comDNS only
MX Records:
10: alt3.aspmx.l.google.com
1: aspmx.l.google.com
5: alt1.aspmx.l.google.com
5: alt2.aspmx.l.google.com
10: alt4.aspmx.l.google.com
SOA:Serial: 31, TTL: 300s

DNSSEC Status

DNSSEC Not Enabled

DNS Performance

Resolution Time:51ms

SPF Analysis

SPF Record:
v=spf1 include:_spf.google.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 uses a modern JavaScript framework (Nuxt.js) and UI library (Ant Design), indicating a contemporary technical infrastructure. Google Tag Manager is used for analytics and marketing tracking. The site appears moderately optimized for performance and mobile devices but lacks advanced SEO and accessibility features. No CMS or hosting provider information was identified. The technical implementation is solid but could be improved with enhanced security configurations and richer business content.
Analyze Another Website