Is rophim.ro a scam site? Scam, spam & reviews
Scores & key points
Caution signals ⓘ
- [Medium] Newly registered domain.
Reputation
Review summary — rophim.ro
Overall 63 (Use with caution)Some security settings are missing or not disclosed, so it should be used with care.
Strengths
- Valid SSL/TLS certificate
Weaknesses
- HSTS not set
- CSP not set
- SPF not configured
- DMARC not configured
- Domain registered within the last 6 months
Detailed review — rophim.ro
Domain review
Domain created: 2025-10-16T00:00:00Z (≈ 3m). Registrar: Netim. Hosting / AS: CLOUDFLARENET - Cloudflare, Inc., US. Popularity: OPR 0.00/10. Reputation: GSB clean WebRisk clean. Certificate valid until: 2026-03-14T11:59:01+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 - Cloudflare, Inc., US. HSTS Off (preload: Unknown). Applies 2/6 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 (≈ 3m) (created on 2025-10-16T00:00:00Z).
GSB clean
WebRisk clean
Certificate valid until: 2026-03-14T11:59:01+00:00.
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: 2026-01-24 06:53:17
Claim website ownership
Traffic signals
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 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@rophim.ro; ruf=mailto:dmarc@rophim.ro; fo=1
@ 3600 MX 10 mail.rophim.ro.
Domain lineage
-
2025-10-16Domain registered: 2025-10-16T00:00:00Z
Essentials
Threat insight
- New domain (< 6 months)
- 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.
- 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.
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. 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 c16c2949a3742f5d66b9b31dde34583a89fbfbe4a8832d0b08ab27cfe304509f