Is fgfg.com a scam site? Scam, spam & reviews
Scores & key points
Caution signals ⓘ
- [Medium] No valid SSL/TLS certificate found.
- [Low] Security headers such as HSTS and CSP are missing or insufficient.
Reputation
Review summary — fgfg.com
Overall 67 (Use with caution)Some security settings are missing or not disclosed, so it should be used with care.
Strengths
- Domain age ≥ 1 year
Weaknesses
- No valid SSL/TLS certificate
- HSTS not set
- CSP not set
- SPF not configured
- DMARC not configured
Detailed review — fgfg.com
Domain review
Domain created: 2000-06-06T12:05:39Z (≈ 25y 6m). Registrar: GoDaddy.com, LLC. Hosting / AS: Apache — United States. Popularity: OPR 2.84/10. Reputation: GSB clean WebRisk clean.
Shop / transaction review
No mixed content detected. No mixed content detected. Structured data: Organization Absent, contactPoint Absent. Hidden text ratio 0%.
Technical review
HTTP 200 Success · Server Apache. HSTS Off (preload: Unknown). Applies 0/6 security headers. DNSSEC Off. 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
Age: about (≈ 25y 6m) (created on 2000-06-06T12:05:39Z).
GSB clean
WebRisk clean
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: 2025-11-19 09:33:49
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=spf1 include:_spf.google.com ~all
v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:dmarc@fgfg.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc@fgfg.com; fo=1
@ 3600 MX 10 mail.fgfg.com.
Domain lineage
-
2000-06-06Domain registered: 2000-06-06T12:05:39Z
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.
- Without SPF, resistance to email sender spoofing is low. We recommend setting SPF records on any domain that sends email.
- If DMARC is absent or set to p=none, protection against sender spoofing is weak. Consider quarantine/reject policies.
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)
Before entering payment or personal information, verify the site operator/contact, HTTPS enforcement (HSTS), and the presence of DMARC and TLS‑RPT.
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 7dac586bbfe56eb61001e55a6159e28cb364a4559c213111bf640c136254cd3f