Skip to main content

Is w3f.tools a Scam? Security Check Results - w3f.tools Reviews

W

Is w3f.tools Safe? Security Analysis for Page not found ยท GitHub Pages

Check if w3f.tools is a scam or legitimate. Free security scan and reviews.

OtherN/asmall
GitHub Pages
Analyzed 9/6/2025Completed 4:53:12 PM
55
Security Score
MEDIUM RISK

AI Summary

The website at w3f.tools currently serves only a 404 error page hosted on GitHub Pages, indicating the absence of active content or business presence. No metadata, structured data, or business information is available, and the site lacks privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies. The technical infrastructure is minimal, relying solely on GitHub Pages hosting with a restrictive Content-Security-Policy header but no visible SSL or advanced security configurations. No forms, scripts, or analytics tools are present, and no contact or social media links beyond a reference to GitHub status Twitter are found. The WHOIS data is privacy protected, limiting trust and legitimacy assessment. Overall, the site appears inactive or a placeholder with very low business credibility and content quality.

Detected Technologies

GitHub Pages

๐Ÿง AI Business Intelligence

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

Business Intelligence

Market & Strategic Analysis

Due to the lack of any business-related content, no market positioning, competitive advantages, or business model insights can be derived. The domain is privacy protected and does not disclose registrant information, which is common for inactive or early-stage projects. No partnerships, revenue streams, or target customer segments are identifiable. The absence of any business or contact information suggests the domain is not currently used for commercial purposes.

Security Posture Analysis

Comprehensive Security Assessment

The security posture is minimal but not absent. The site uses a strict Content-Security-Policy header, which is a positive security practice. However, the lack of HTTPS information, absence of other security headers, and the presence of only a 404 error page limit the security maturity. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data are detected, but the site does not demonstrate active security management or incident response readiness. Compliance with GDPR or other regulations cannot be assessed due to missing policies.

Strategic Recommendations

Priority Actions for Security Improvement

1

Publish valid website content to replace the 404 error page and provide business information.

โœจObservations

AI-powered comprehensive website and business analysis.

AI-Enhanced Website Analysis

Business Insights

Content Quality:

poor

Branding:

inconsistent

Technical Stack

Technologies:
GitHub Pages
Platforms:
GitHub Pages
Performance:

moderate

Mobile:

basic

Accessibility:

basic

SEO:

poor

Security Assessment

Security Score:
40/100
Best Practices:
  • Content-Security-Policy header present

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 is currently a 404 error page hosted on GitHub Pages.

๐Ÿ›ก๏ธSecurity Headers

HTTP security headers analysis and recommendations.

Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis

30/100
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 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

๐Ÿ‘คGDPR 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: Twitter

GDPR Compliance Analysis

Privacy Policy0% confidence
Cookie Policy0% confidence
Contact Information Found90% confidence
phone

๐Ÿ›ก๏ธ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: digital

๐Ÿ“งEmail Security

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

Email Security

SPF, DKIM, and DMARC validation

80/100
Score

No DMARC reporting

LOW

DMARC aggregate reports not configured

Strict DMARC Alignment

LOW

Strict alignment may cause legitimate emails to fail

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 -all
DNS Lookups:0/10
Policy:-all
DKIM Selectors Found
Selector:default0
Selector:google0
Selector:k10
Selector:k20
Selector:selector10
Selector:selector20
Selector:mail0
Selector:email0
Selector:dkim0
Selector:s10
DMARC Details
Policy:reject
Subdomain Policy:reject

๐Ÿ†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 88 days

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

๐Ÿ“ŠDNS 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:185.199.111.153, 185.199.110.153, 185.199.108.153, 185.199.109.153
Name Servers:
dee.ns.cloudflare.comDNS only
west.ns.cloudflare.comDNS only
SOA:Serial: 2381941410, TTL: 1800s

DNSSEC Status

DNSSEC Not Enabled

DNS Performance

Resolution Time:56ms

SPF Analysis

SPF Record:
v=spf1 -all

โšกNetwork 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

๐Ÿ”งTechnical Analysis

Detailed technical findings and analysis from AI assessment.

Technical Analysis

Comprehensive security assessment findings

Additional Findings

The website is hosted on GitHub Pages, indicating a static site platform with limited backend capabilities. The HTML is minimal and valid but only serves an error page. No CMS or advanced frameworks are detected. Performance is likely moderate due to GitHub's infrastructure, but mobile optimization and SEO are poor due to lack of content and metadata. No analytics or tracking scripts are present, indicating minimal technical complexity. The site requires modernization and content deployment to fulfill business or user needs.
Analyze Another Website