HTTPS and TLS transport
Certificate validity and expiry, whether plain HTTP redirects to HTTPS, and whether HSTS is declared. An expired certificate is the outage nobody has a monitor for.
A passive review of the security posture your site advertises publicly: TLS and HTTPS transport, defensive response headers, exposed configuration, and known WordPress advisories.
Passive external automated assessment only. Unavailable checks stay neutral. This is not a penetration test or a guarantee of security.
Everything here is visible to anyone who visits your site. We just read it carefully.
Certificate validity and expiry, whether plain HTTP redirects to HTTPS, and whether HSTS is declared. An expired certificate is the outage nobody has a monitor for.
Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, Referrer-Policy, X-Frame-Options and friends. These are the cheapest hardening available and they are usually simply absent.
Publicly reachable files that should not be — environment files, version-control directories, backups and debug endpoints left on after a deploy.
Where a WordPress version or plugin is publicly identifiable, we match it against high-confidence advisory data and flag anything on the known-exploited list.
Server and framework versions announced in headers, verbose error output, and other details that narrow an attacker's search for free.
A separate, consent-gated lookup of whether your domain is currently flagged by threat-intelligence providers. The verdict is never stored in the retained report.
Most sites are not compromised by a bespoke attack. They are found by an automated scan looking for exactly these signals.
Mass scanning for exposed config files and known-vulnerable plugin versions is continuous and cheap. Not advertising a target is most of the defence.
Most defensive headers are a few lines of server or framework configuration. They are missing on the majority of sites purely because nobody checked.
An expired certificate blocks every visitor with a full-page browser warning. Knowing the expiry date before your customers do is worth the scan on its own.
Requests a visitor could make, read more carefully than a visitor would.
Ordinary HTTPS requests to public URLs. No payloads, no fuzzing, no attempt to exploit anything we find.
Findings are weighted by severity and by how certain the evidence is, so a confident critical counts and a low-confidence guess does not dominate your score.
If a check could not run, it is shown as unavailable rather than silently passing. A gap in coverage is reported as a gap, not as a clean result.
What this is, what it is emphatically not, and how the score is built.
No, and it is important not to treat it as one. This is a passive external assessment: we make ordinary requests to public URLs and read what comes back. Nothing is exploited, no payloads are sent, no authentication is attempted. A penetration test is an authorised, manual, intrusive engagement by a human, and nothing here substitutes for one.
Yes. The scan does no more than a handful of normal page requests would. It does not attempt logins, submit forms, or send anything a visitor could not send. You will see it in your access logs as ordinary traffic.
It starts at 100 and deducts for findings by severity, scaled by how confident the evidence is. Each category — transport, headers, exposure, software advisories, threat reputation — has a cap on how much it can deduct, so one noisy area cannot drag the whole score to zero on its own.
Technically the checks are passive and equivalent to visiting the site, but scan sites you are responsible for. Reports contain findings about a real system and are yours to handle appropriately, and the terms of service are the binding word on acceptable use.
Some checks depend on external intelligence feeds or on signals your site may not expose. When one cannot run, we mark it unavailable and leave it neutral rather than counting it as a pass. Treating an unknown as a clean result is how scanners produce false confidence.
You are not advertising the problems this scan can see from the outside, which is genuinely worth having. It says nothing about application logic, access control, dependency vulnerabilities in code we cannot see, or anything behind a login. Treat a clean result as a cleared baseline, not a verdict.
Security posture is one of five checks. Each runs on its own, or all of them together in one score.
Find the barriers that turn visitors away, and the compliance gaps that carry legal risk.
Slow pages lose sales and rankings. See exactly which pages drag, on mobile and desktop.
Dead ends frustrate visitors and quietly drain SEO. We crawl every page and flag every 404.
Check whether ChatGPT, Perplexity and Google AI Overviews can reach, read and quote your content.
Know your site is down before your users tell you, and watch its health score over time.
Run every check in one pass and get a single health score with the top three things to fix.