Is gitlab.com a scam site? Scam, spam & reviews
Scores & key points
Overview
online git source code repository host
+22 Show more languages
Caution signals ⓘ
No clear warnings detected.
Reputation
Review summary — gitlab.com
Overall 93 (Mostly safe)Multiple security indicators are favorable and there are few major risk signals.
Strengths
- Valid SSL/TLS certificate
- HSTS enabled
- CSP enabled
- SPF configured
- DMARC configured
- Domain age ≥ 1 year
Weaknesses
Detailed review — gitlab.com
Domain review
Domain created: 2004-01-15T18:47:28Z (≈ 21y 11m). Registrar: GANDI SAS. Hosting / AS: CLOUDFLARENET, US. Popularity: Tranco #506, OPR 7.05/10. Reputation: GSB clean WebRisk clean. Email security: SPF On, DMARC reject. Certificate valid until: 2026-05-11T23:59:59+00:00.
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 CLOUDFLARENET, US. HSTS Off (preload: Unknown). Applies 6/6 security headers. DNSSEC Off. Email security: SPF On, DMARC reject. MTA‑STS policy: None. TLS‑RPT Off. security.txt: available (https://gitlab.com/.well-known/security.txt). Missing cookie attributes: Secure×0 / HttpOnly×0 / SameSite×0. JS obfuscation score 0. Reputation: GSB clean, WebRisk clean → overall Good.
Explanation — strengths and stability
Age: about (≈ 21y 11m) (created on 2004-01-15T18:47:28Z).
GSB clean
WebRisk clean
Certificate valid until: 2026-05-11T23:59:59+00:00.
Email security: SPF On, DMARC reject.
Applies 6/6 security headers.
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.
Without DNSSEC, trust relies solely on parent name servers and DNS tampering risks can be higher in some environments.
Without MTA‑STS, SMTP TLS enforcement is weaker.
Without TLS‑RPT, it is harder to collect TLS failure signals and operational insight.
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.
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: 2025-11-30 07:47:22
Claim website ownership
Traffic signals
Performance
Security headers
- HSTS ⓘ
- Content‑Security‑Policy ⓘ
- X‑Content‑Type‑Options ⓘ
- X‑Frame‑Options ⓘ
- Referrer‑Policy ⓘ
- Permissions‑Policy ⓘ
Domain lineage
-
2004-01-15Domain registered: 2004-01-15T18:47:28Z
Essentials
DMARC details
v=DMARC1; p=reject; pct=100v=DMARC1; p=reject; pct=100Threat insight
- Without HSTS, downgrade and man‑in‑the‑middle attacks can weaken HTTPS enforcement. Enable HSTS and prepare for preload registration.
- 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. There are currently few clear signs of malicious behavior, but insufficient security headers or email protection can increase the risk of phishing or man‑in‑the‑middle attacks. Before entering important information, re‑check the domain spelling and how you reached the site (ads, DMs, shortened URLs, etc.). 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.
Set‑Cookie (samples)
__cf_bm=ShvMtOskmeOp8Q4Caxof_4RzqflbORwhHqxOoMfP9qA-1764488842-1.0.1.1-MfVLIPJRFEJbj2T1OQCvgbNb00D0QrrbQ11z452jMd8PWBUqM30Nw8pLCB1zlcd28RrRuNIFKR6EImwBDzMt0AA7lxYlUr_ugdTWAlZ2HRc; path=/; expires=Sun, 30-Nov-25 08:17:22 GMT; domain=.gitlab.com; HttpOnly; Secure; SameSite=None</code><br><code>_cfuvid=ROBebdEiYyc1i5QHhe0pSKBhtbTu4TGDhi1zIRhNkwI-1764488842557-0.0.1.1-604800000; path=/; domain=.gitlab.com; HttpOnly; Secure; SameSite=None
User scenarios
If you make a payment on this site
No strong malicious signs were found, but online payments always carry some risk. Double-check the amount, payee and refund policy before you pay.
If you log in or enter personal data
No clear malicious patterns were found, but treat passwords and 2FA codes as highly sensitive. Avoid reusing passwords across sites.
Server location ⓘ
History
Change ⓘ --Recently added sites
Reviews
Average - / total 0
Checksum f1ba41690001adc3a535b4834b271f4f352af296239645624fe6b2dadf1d7ef0