Skip to main content

Is uniamo.org a Scam? Security Check Results - uniamo.org Reviews

U

Is uniamo.org Safe? Security Analysis for Waiting for the redirectiron...

Check if uniamo.org is a scam or legitimate. Free security scan and reviews.

OtherN/asmall
JavaScript
Analyzed 10/3/2025Completed 8:51:59 PM
49
Security Score
HIGH RISK

AI Summary

The website uniamo.org currently presents a security challenge page that blocks direct access to its content, indicating the presence of a Web Application Firewall or similar security mechanism, powered by BitNinja.IO. The domain is long-established, registered since 2002 with Tucows Domains Inc., but the website content is minimal and outdated, referencing legacy CMS versions Joomla 1.5 and WordPress 2.5. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies are present, nor is there any contact or business information visible. The technical infrastructure appears outdated and lacks modern security best practices such as DNSSEC and security headers. Overall, the site exhibits a low level of digital maturity and poor user experience due to the blocking mechanism and lack of content.

Detected Technologies

JavaScript

🧠AI Business Intelligence

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

Business Intelligence

Market & Strategic Analysis

Due to the lack of accessible content and business information, it is not possible to determine the company's market position, business model, or target audience. The domain age suggests a potentially long-standing entity, but the absence of updated content and contact details limits insights into operational status or growth. No partnerships or subsidiaries are identified. The presence of a security check indicates an attempt to protect the site from automated threats, but also hinders transparency and user trust.

Security Posture Analysis

Comprehensive Security Assessment

The security posture is mixed; while the site employs a security challenge mechanism via BitNinja.IO, it lacks DNSSEC and uses outdated CMS versions known for vulnerabilities. No modern security headers or SSL/TLS configuration details are available. The absence of privacy and cookie policies further indicates compliance gaps. The security score is low, and the site would benefit from CMS upgrades, enhanced domain security, and improved compliance measures.

Strategic Recommendations

Priority Actions for Security Improvement

1

Upgrade Joomla and WordPress installations to current supported versions to mitigate vulnerabilities.

Observations

AI-powered comprehensive website and business analysis.

AI-Enhanced Website Analysis

Generic Detected

Page shows a security check with automatic redirect and BitNinja.IO security check link, indicating a WAF or security challenge page blocking direct content access.

Analysis results may be incomplete. For accurate analysis, please contact guard@offseq.com

Business Insights

Description:

Joomla!

Content Quality:

poor

Branding:

inconsistent

Technical Stack

Technologies:
JavaScript
Frameworks:
Joomla! 1.5WordPress 2.5
Performance:

slow

Mobile:

poor

Accessibility:

poor

SEO:

poor

Security Assessment

Security Score:
30/100
Best Practices:
  • JavaScript browser integrity check
  • BitNinja.IO security check

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 blocked by a security challenge page.

🛡️Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis and recommendations.

Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis

20/100
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

👤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
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: energy, transport, digital

📧Email Security

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

Email Security

SPF, DKIM, and DMARC validation

55/100
Score

DMARC not enforcing

MEDIUM

DMARC policy is set to "none"

No DMARC reporting

LOW

DMARC aggregate reports not configured

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

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.mandrillapp.com include:_spf.google.com include:aruba.it include:amazonses.com ~all
DNS Lookups:4/10
Policy:~all
DMARC Details
Policy:none
Forensic Reports:segreteria@uniamo.org

🏆SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis.

SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis

72/100
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 60 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

65/100
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 Transfer Lock Not Enabled

MEDIUM

Domain can be transferred without authorization

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
23 years(mature)
Expiry Risk
low(275 days)
Protection Level
noneDNSSEC OFF
Suspicious Indicators Detected
  • No domain protection locks enabled

DNS Records

A Records:93.95.216.161
Name Servers:
dns.technorail.com
dns2.technorail.com
dns3.arubadns.net
dns4.arubadns.cz
MX Records:
5: alt1.aspmx.l.google.com
1: aspmx.l.google.com
10: alt3.aspmx.l.google.com
5: alt2.aspmx.l.google.com
10: alt4.aspmx.l.google.com
SOA:Serial: 2025062903, TTL: 3600s

DNSSEC Status

DNSSEC Not Enabled

DNS Performance

Resolution Time:78ms

SPF Analysis

SPF Record:
v=spf1 include:spf.mandrillapp.com include:_spf.google.com include:aruba.it include:amazonses.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 legacy CMS platforms (Joomla 1.5 and WordPress 2.5) which are no longer supported and pose security risks. The presence of JavaScript-based browser integrity checks and an automatic redirect form indicates a security challenge page likely implemented by BitNinja.IO. No analytics or advertising technologies are detected. The site lacks modern SEO and accessibility features and shows poor performance indicators due to blocking and minimal content. Hosting details are limited to registrar information, with no clear hosting provider identified.
Analyze Another Website