Blog
Contact
Sign in
Scan complete
D
60/100
anonse.com
1 critical issue needs immediate attention.
16/16
checks
43
passed
finished
Scan timestamps
Created
Jul 22, 2026, 3:35 PM
Started
Jul 22, 2026, 3:35 PM
Finished
Jul 22, 2026, 3:35 PM
Updated
Jul 22, 2026, 3:35 PM
Export PDF
Re-scan
Findings by severity
65 results
1
Critical
10
High
8
Medium
3
Low
43
Pass
Report coverage
98.53%
30 skipped - these limit completeness.
30 skipped
All
95
Critical
1
High
10
Medium
8
Low
3
Pass
43
Skipped
30
Email
96%
Domain Alignment (DMARC)
Learn how it works
Info
2/7 pass
Domain Alignment (DMARC)
DMARC policy is monitoring only
The DMARC policy uses p=none and does not ask receivers to block or quarantine failing mail.
High
Domain Alignment (DMARC)
DMARC subdomain policy is weak
Subdomains are not protected by an enforcement policy.
High
Domain Alignment (DMARC)
DMARC aggregate reporting is not configured
The DMARC record does not request aggregate reports, which reduces visibility into authentication failures.
Medium
Domain Alignment (DMARC)
DMARC alignment is relaxed
The DMARC record allows relaxed identifier alignment for DKIM or SPF.
Low
Transport Encryption (SMTP TLS)
Learn how it works
Info
4/5 pass
Transport Encryption (SMTP TLS)
Some MX host certificates are expired or have name mismatches
At least one MX host presents an expired certificate or a certificate whose name does not match the MX hostname. Senders enforcing MTA-STS (RFC 8461) require a name-matched, time-valid certificate and will refuse delivery to these hosts.
High
Certificate Binding (DANE)
Learn how it works
Info
1/5 pass
Certificate Binding (DANE)
No MX host TLSA zone is protected by DNSSEC
None of the MX hosts have DNSSEC on their TLSA lookup zones. DANE SMTP cannot function without DNSSEC, as sending servers will ignore TLSA records from unsigned zones.
Critical
Transport Policy (MTA-STS)
Learn how it works
Info
1/6 pass
Transport Policy (MTA-STS)
MTA-STS DNS record is missing
The domain does not publish an MTA-STS TXT record, so sending servers cannot discover or enforce an MTA-STS policy.
High
TLS Reporting (TLS-RPT)
Learn how it works
Info
1/4 pass
TLS Reporting (TLS-RPT)
No TLS-RPT record found
The domain does not publish a TLS-RPT record. Sending servers cannot report TLS errors to this domain.
High
DNS
100%
DNS Integrity (DNSSEC)
Learn how it works
Info
0/7 pass
DNS Integrity (DNSSEC)
DNSSEC is not enabled
The parent zone does not publish a DS record for this domain.
Medium
CAA and Certificate Issuance Surface
Learn how it works
Info
1/6 pass
CAA and Certificate Issuance Surface
No CAA record is published
The domain does not publish a CAA record, so any publicly trusted certificate authority may issue certificates for it after standard validation.
Low
TLS
100%
TLS Certificate
Learn how it works
Info
8/9 pass
TLS Certificate
Certificate chain is not correctly ordered
The certificates sent by the server are not in the expected order (leaf first, followed by intermediates). Some TLS clients are strict about chain order and may fail to build trust.
Medium
TLS Configuration
Learn how it works
Info
2/6 pass
TLS Configuration
Deprecated TLS version accepted (TLS 1.0 / TLS 1.1)
The server accepts TLS 1.0 and/or TLS 1.1, both formally deprecated by RFC 8996. These versions lack support for modern authenticated encryption and are the underlying cause of several named attacks (e.g. BEAST against TLS 1.0 CBC ciphers).
High
TLS Configuration
Legacy cipher suites accepted (3DES / CBC in TLS 1.0)
The server accepts cipher suites weakened by the 64-bit block size of 3DES (SWEET32, CVE-2016-2183) and/or CBC-mode ciphers in TLS 1.0 (contributing factor to BEAST). Exploitation requires specific conditions (e.g. very large data transfers for SWEET32).
Medium
TLS Configuration
Cipher suites without forward secrecy accepted
The server accepts one or more cipher suites using static RSA or static (EC)DH key exchange. If the server's private key is ever compromised, an attacker with recorded traffic can decrypt past sessions negotiated with these cipher suites.
Medium
Web
100%
Disclosure Policy (security.txt)
Learn how it works
Info
0/4 pass
Disclosure Policy (security.txt)
security.txt is not present or not usable
The domain does not publish a usable security.txt file. Either both /.well-known/security.txt and /security.txt returned no file (404/401/403/410), or the location responded with HTTP 200 but non-text/plain content (typically an application page) or a body that is not valid UTF-8.
Medium
HTTP Security Headers
Learn how it works
Info
0/7 pass
HTTP Security Headers
HSTS is not enforced
The site does not send a usable Strict-Transport-Security header, so browsers do not automatically upgrade future requests to HTTPS.
High
HTTP Security Headers
Content-Security-Policy is not enforced
The site does not send an enforced Content-Security-Policy header, leaving no restriction on script execution, framing, or resource loading beyond what other headers provide.
High
HTTP Security Headers
Clickjacking protection is missing
The site does not restrict framing through CSP frame-ancestors or a usable X-Frame-Options value, so it can be embedded in a frame on any origin.
High
HTTP Security Headers
MIME sniffing is not disabled
The site does not send X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff, so browsers may MIME-sniff a response and interpret it as a different, potentially executable content type.
High
HTTP Security Headers
Referrer-Policy is not declared
The site does not send a Referrer-Policy header. Modern browsers default to a reasonably safe behavior, but the site does not explicitly guarantee it.
Medium
HTTP Security Headers
Permissions-Policy is missing or ineffective
The site either does not send a Permissions-Policy header, or the header only lists directives with a wildcard allowlist that does not restrict anything.
Medium
HTTP Security Headers
Deprecated security headers are present
The response sends one or more deprecated headers (X-XSS-Protection, Expect-CT, or Public-Key-Pins) that modern browsers ignore or that carry their own operational risk (HPKP).
Low
Feedback
