Is redis.io a scam site? Scam, spam & reviews
Scores & key points
Overview
ネットワーク接続された永続化可能なインメモリデータベース
+20 Show more languages
Caution signals ⓘ
No clear warnings detected.
Reputation
Review summary — redis.io
Overall 94 (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 — redis.io
Domain review
Domain created: 2010-05-28T22:09:44Z (≈ 15y 6m). Registrar: Name.com, Inc.. Hosting / AS: CLOUDFLARENET, US. Popularity: Tranco #3545, OPR 6.37/10. Reputation: GSB clean WebRisk clean. Email security: SPF On, DMARC reject. Certificate valid until: 2026-02-11T18:14:42+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 200 Success · Server CLOUDFLARENET, US. HSTS Off (preload: Unknown). Applies 2/6 security headers. DNSSEC Off. Email security: SPF On, DMARC reject. MTA‑STS policy: None. TLS‑RPT Off. security.txt: not available. 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 (≈ 15y 6m) (created on 2010-05-28T22:09:44Z).
GSB clean
WebRisk clean
Certificate valid until: 2026-02-11T18:14:42+00:00.
Email security: SPF On, DMARC reject.
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.
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.
Looking at operator information together with trust metrics helps you judge brand/merchant consistency and the likelihood of long‑term operation.
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: 2025-11-20 13:13:06
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 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;
Domain lineage
-
2010-05-28Domain registered: 2010-05-28T22:09:44Z
Essentials
DMARC details
v=DMARC1; p=reject; pct=100; rua=mailto:097fbda2@mxtoolbox.dmarc-report.com; ruf=mailto:097fbda2@forensics.dmarc-report.com; adkim=r; aspf=r; fo=1v=DMARC1; p=reject; pct=100; rua=mailto:097fbda2@mxtoolbox.dmarc-report.com; ruf=mailto:097fbda2@forensics.dmarc-report.com; adkim=r; aspf=r; fo=1Threat insight
- 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.
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)
Before entering payment or personal information, verify the site operator/contact, HTTPS enforcement (HSTS), and the presence of DMARC and TLS‑RPT.
Set‑Cookie (samples)
_cfuvid=cWPL1cQICPvtOlkEmrC1KQwoE0nA1xlSBOsu5Q5HDFc-1763644386775-0.0.1.1-604800000; path=/; domain=.redis.io; 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 d831ce2de87f61b2cc02e7d17b8ac6a12bc411e89f57ac396862252d51fad671