Is elmundo.es a scam site? Scam, spam & reviews
Scores & key points
Overview
スペインの日刊新聞
+26 Show more languages
Caution signals ⓘ
- [Medium] No valid SSL/TLS certificate found.
- [Low] Without SPF/DMARC, email sender spoofing risk is increased.
Reputation
Review summary — elmundo.es
Overall 62 (Use with caution)Some security settings are missing or not disclosed, so it should be used with care.
Strengths
- SPF configured
Weaknesses
- No valid SSL/TLS certificate
- HSTS not set
- CSP not set
- DMARC not configured
Detailed review — elmundo.es
Domain review
Hosting / AS: GOOGLE-CLOUD-PLATFORM, US — The Netherlands. Popularity: Tranco #958, OPR 6.43/10. Reputation: GSB clean WebRisk clean. Email security: SPF On, DMARC None.
Shop / transaction review
No mixed content detected. No mixed content detected. Structured data: Organization Absent, contactPoint Absent. Hidden text ratio 0%.
Technical review
HTTP 301 Redirect · Server GOOGLE-CLOUD-PLATFORM, US. HSTS Off (preload: Unknown). Applies 0/6 security headers. DNSSEC Off. Email security: SPF On, DMARC None. MTA‑STS policy: None. TLS‑RPT Off. security.txt: not available. JS obfuscation score 0. Reputation: GSB clean, WebRisk clean → overall Good.
Explanation — strengths and stability
GSB clean
WebRisk clean
Email security: SPF On, DMARC None.
No mixed content detected.
Looking at operator information together with trust metrics helps you judge brand/merchant consistency and the likelihood of long‑term operation.
Checking payment page security (HTTPS enforcement, form target host consistency, script integrity) along with customer support and return policy gives a more accurate sense of real‑world trust.
In parallel, applying security headers, automated certificate renewal, email domain protection (DMARC/TLS‑RPT), and removing mixed content will improve overall reliability and delivery/search stability.
Explanation — risks and areas to improve
Without HSTS, downgrade and man‑in‑the‑middle attacks can weaken HTTPS enforcement. Enable HSTS and prepare for preload registration.
Missing key security headers leaves the site vulnerable to clickjacking, MIME sniffing, and data leakage.
Without DNSSEC, trust relies solely on parent name servers and DNS tampering risks can be higher in some environments.
If DMARC is absent or set to p=none, protection against sender spoofing is weak. Consider quarantine/reject policies.
Without MTA‑STS, SMTP TLS enforcement is weaker.
Without TLS‑RPT, it is harder to collect TLS failure signals and operational insight.
Without security.txt, the vulnerability disclosure channel is unclear and response may be delayed.
This analysis is an automated, data‑based opinion for reference only. Please verify the information yourself before paying or downloading anything.
About this report
- First analysis: -
- Last updated: 2025-12-03 09:52:29
Claim website ownership
Traffic signals
Performance
Security headers
- HSTS ⓘ
- Content‑Security‑Policy ⓘ
- X‑Content‑Type‑Options ⓘ
- X‑Frame‑Options ⓘ
- Referrer‑Policy ⓘ
- Permissions‑Policy ⓘ
add_header Strict-Transport-Security "max-age=15552000; includeSubDomains; preload" always;
add_header Content-Security-Policy "default-src 'self'; img-src 'self' data:; object-src 'none'; base-uri 'self'";
add_header X-Content-Type-Options "nosniff" always;
add_header X-Frame-Options "SAMEORIGIN" always;
add_header Referrer-Policy "strict-origin-when-cross-origin" always;
add_header Permissions-Policy "geolocation=(); microphone=(); camera=()" always;
v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:dmarc@elmundo.es; ruf=mailto:dmarc@elmundo.es; fo=1
Essentials
Threat insight
- Using invalid or expired SSL/TLS certificates triggers browser warnings and increases the risk of man‑in‑the‑middle attacks or confusion with phishing sites. Check certificate status regularly.
- Without HSTS, downgrade and man‑in‑the‑middle attacks can weaken HTTPS enforcement. Enable HSTS and prepare for preload registration.
- Missing key security headers leaves the site vulnerable to clickjacking, MIME sniffing, and data leakage.
- If DMARC is absent or set to p=none, protection against sender spoofing is weak. Consider quarantine/reject policies.
- Suspicious JavaScript patterns detected
The risk score of this site is calculated by combining browser security headers, SSL status, mixed content, email domain protection (SPF/DMARC), redirect/obfuscation patterns, and the results of Google Safe Browsing and WebRisk. Several risk signals are present. Before making payments or downloading files, check HTTPS enforcement (HSTS), DMARC policy, and the presence of mixed content, and compare the site in a new tab with official accounts or in‑app links. Before entering payment or personal information, verify operator information (company/contact), HTTPS enforcement, DMARC/TLS‑RPT, and check for mixed content.
Deep scan (HTML / headers)
- Suspicious JavaScript obfuscation patterns have been observed.
- The site heavily relies on third‑party resources.
If unexpected popups, wallet connection requests, or download prompts appear, cancel once and re‑check via official announcements or community channels.
User scenarios
If you make a payment on this site
Some technical or reputation signals suggest caution. Check the address bar, HTTPS and browser warnings before entering payment details. Mixed or non-encrypted (HTTP) resources or weak TLS can expose payment data or session tokens on some networks. Missing or weak DMARC lets attackers send spoofed payment emails. Type the domain manually instead of clicking links in unexpected messages.
If you log in or enter personal data
Some script, content or header patterns warrant caution. Compare the login link with official sources before entering credentials.
Server location ⓘ
History
Change ⓘ --Recently added sites
Reviews
Average - / total 0
Checksum d09ca0ee23245af74f853bbb1b92bfe79e294eaaf642b4ef734ec4a616f1a689