Is frid.ge safe to use as a vendor?

frid.ge scored 46/100 on LynxRadar's security posture assessment. The domain has significant security gaps that should be addressed. 3 checks passed, 2 warnings, 2 critical issues across 10 passive checks including TLS, DMARC, security headers, breaches, and CVEs.

Does frid.ge have SPF configured?

No. No SPF record found for frid.ge.

Does frid.ge have security headers configured?

frid.ge has 0 of 0 recommended security headers. All recommended headers present.

Does frid.ge use HSTS?

No. Could not fetch https://frid.ge — connection failed or timed out.

Has frid.ge been involved in a data breach?

No known breaches found. No known breaches found in public disclosure databases.

Does frid.ge have known CVE vulnerabilities?

No server software versions detected in HTTP response headers. This is good practice (version hiding) but means CVE exposure cannot be assessed from external signals alone.

Is frid.ge's SSL certificate valid?

Issues detected. Note: Could not retrieve the live certificate — see the TLS check.

frid.ge Security Report — Grade F (46/100)

Q: What TLS version does frid.ge use?

TLS configuration for frid.ge is not configured. TLS certificate verification failed on frid.ge: [SSL: CERTIFICATE_VERIFY_FAILED] certificate verify failed: unable to get local issuer certificate (_ssl.c:1081)

Q: Does frid.ge have DMARC configured?

No. frid.ge's DMARC policy is set to 'none'. SPF record: no. Issues: No DMARC record found — email spoofing is not prevented; No SPF record found. Note: DKIM couldn't be confirmed from outside (custom selector names can't be looked up, and some DNS hosts don't expose them), so it isn't counted against the score.

Q: Does frid.ge have DNSSEC enabled?

No. Strengths: 3 nameservers configured (NS5.101DOMAIN.COM., NS1.101DOMAIN.COM., NS2.101DOMAIN.COM.); 5 MX records present; Zone transfers properly restricted. Issues: DNSSEC not configured — DNS responses can be spoofed.

Trust rating

Fail · 46/100

Procurement snapshot

2 critical findings identified — these point to architectural gaps, not just configuration tweaks.

Strengths

Known Breaches

MX Records & Mail Provider

CVE Exposure

Questions to ask

Confirm TLS configuration and upgrade timeline

Estimated remediation effort: 2–5 days

Based on a passive external scan — supplement with vendor-provided attestations, not a replacement.

Trust Score Trend

→ No change 1 scan · Last scanned February 18, 2026

Your rating Industry average

Score

100 75 50 25 0

frid.ge

46/100

Compliance & Certifications

Not yet verified

PCI-DSS

AOC not on file

3rd party · QSA

CCPA

Self-reported

GDPR

DPA not on file

Self-reported

Incident History

No public breaches on record

Security Posture

3 items need attention

3 passed

0 of 1 fixed

All 1 critical issue marked as fixed

Re-scan to confirm and update your score.

Turn off unknown — it's outdated and unsafe

TLS Configuration

1–2 hours Critical

This exposes traffic to interception or tampering using publicly documented weaknesses. frid.ge still accepts connections using unknown, an old encryption standard that attackers can exploit to read or tamper with traffic. Every major compliance framework (PCI-DSS, HIPAA, NIST) treats this as a failure. The fix is to simply stop offering it — modern browsers already use TLS 1.2/1.3 automatically, so real visitors won't notice the change.

PCI-DSS 4.0Req 4.2.1

Strong cryptography for transmission

NIST 800-52r2§3.4

TLS 1.0/1.1 must not be used

HIPAA§164.312(e)

Transmission security

How to fix this

1If you're on a managed host or CDN, set the minimum TLS version to 1.2, disabling the old unsafe versions in one click — usually a toggle in their dashboard's SSL/TLS settings. If you manage your own server, update the TLS settings in its config (nginx: ssl_protocols TLSv1.2 TLSv1.3).

ssl_protocols TLSv1.2 TLSv1.3;

2Confirm it worked: search "ssl checker" and enter frid.ge — TLS 1.0 and 1.1 should show as not supported.

TLS upgrade guide

Report unlocked.

View all 3 passed checks

Known Breaches

MX Records & Mail Provider

CVE Exposure

Couldn't check: HSTS Header, Security Headers, Certificate Hygiene — the check didn't complete (the site blocked or timed out our scanner, or a data source was unavailable), so these aren't counted in the score.

Company Signals

Operational risk

Last funding

Employees

Trust Resources

Claim profile →

Trust Center

Not detected

DPA (Data Processing Agreement)

Subprocessors List

Similar companies in B2C E-commerce / Retail

Appears in

B2C E-commerce / Retail vendors

248 companies scanned by LynxRadar

Vendors graded F

169 companies · LynxRadar ranking

Blocking Issues

Issues detected

TLS certificate verification failed on frid.ge: [SSL: CERTIFICATE_VERIFY_FAILED] certificate verify failed: unable to get local issuer certificate (_ssl.c:1081)

Likelihood: ★★★☆☆

Impact: ★★★★☆

Not configured

Issues: No DMARC record found — email spoofing is not prevented; No SPF record found. Note: DKIM couldn't be confirmed from outside (custom selector names can't be looked up, and some DNS hosts don't expose them), so it isn't counted against the score.

Likelihood: ★★★★★

Impact: ★★★★☆

Missing

No SPF record found.

Likelihood: ★★★★★

Impact: ★★★★☆

Medium Priority

Not enabled

Strengths: 3 nameservers configured (NS5.101DOMAIN.COM., NS1.101DOMAIN.COM., NS2.101DOMAIN.COM.); 5 MX records present; Zone transfers properly restricted. Issues: DNSSEC not configured — DNS responses can be spoofed.

Likelihood: ★★☆☆☆

Impact: ★★★☆☆

Best Practice

Warn

Could not load frid.ge's homepage to detect its e-commerce platform, payment processor, or CDN.