Overview
Findings
Actions
Details
Related
AI-Generated Summary
What this means
functionofbeauty.com scored 80/100, demonstrating a strong security posture. Minor improvements are noted below.
Positive signals: Known Breaches, TLS Configuration, CVE Exposure all passed.
4 action items identified, including 0 critical. The issues are configuration gaps, not architectural problems. A focused remediation effort of 2–5 days could address all findings.
How functionofbeauty.com compares
Grade distribution across 2378 companies we've scanned. functionofbeauty.com scores better than 64% of them.
71
A+
22
A
180
A-
181
B+
69
B
333
B-
111
C+
111
C
295
C-
110
D+
92
D
216
D-
587
F
functionofbeauty.com — Grade B- (80/100)
2378 companies scanned
Security checks
Each check inspects a different part of functionofbeauty.com's public security setup. Green means healthy, yellow needs attention, red is a problem.
DMARC / Email Security
Strengths: SPF record present; DKIM configured (selectors: google, s1, s2, mandrill). Issues: DMARC policy is 'none' (monitoring only, no enforcement); DMARC has no aggregate report URI (rua).
DNS Configuration
Strengths: 4 nameservers configured (ns-1190.awsdns-20.org., ns-1610.awsdns-09.co.uk., ns-431.awsdns-53.com., ns-576.awsdns-08.net.); 5 MX records present; Zone transfers properly restricted. Issues: DNSSEC not configured — DNS responses can be spoofed.
HSTS Header
HSTS present but max-age is low (7889238s). Recommended minimum: 15768000 (6 months).
Security Headers
3/5 security headers present. Missing: Referrer-Policy, Permissions-Policy.
Known Breaches
No known breaches found in public disclosure databases.
TLS Configuration
TLSv1.3 negotiated with TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256-bit). Strong configuration with no deprecated protocols or weak ciphers detected.
CVE Exposure
Detected technologies: cloudflare. (cloudflare detected but excluded from CVE matching — upstream infrastructure). All detected technologies are upstream CDN/proxy infrastructure. No application-level software versions exposed.
Certificate Hygiene
Strengths: Certificate valid, 78 days remaining; Issued by Google Trust Services.
Recommended actions
4 items
Steps to improve functionofbeauty.com's security grade, ranked by impact.
1
Strengthen email authentication configuration
Email authentication is partially configured for functionofbeauty.com but has gaps. Actions needed: upgrade DMARC policy from 'none' to 'quarantine' or 'reject'. Until DMARC enforcement is active, spoofed emails may still reach recipients.
Compliance impact
NIST CSFPR.AC-7
Email authentication is a required access control
How to fix this
1
Upgrade DMARC policy to p=quarantine (then p=reject after monitoring)
2
Verify with: nslookup -type=txt _dmarc.functionofbeauty.com
See all recommendations
Enter your work email to unlock the full action plan.
No spam. We only send security-related updates.
Report unlocked.
2
Enable DNSSEC on your domain
Without DNSSEC, DNS responses for functionofbeauty.com can be spoofed, potentially redirecting users to malicious sites. This requires coordination with your domain registrar to publish DS records.
Compliance impact
NIST 800-53SC-20
Secure name/address resolution service
How to fix this
1
Check if your DNS provider supports DNSSEC (Cloudflare, Route53, etc.)
2
Enable DNSSEC signing in your DNS provider dashboard
3
Add the DS record to your registrar for .com TLD
4
Verify: dig +dnssec functionofbeauty.com
3
Increase HSTS max-age duration
HSTS is enabled but the max-age (0s) is below the recommended minimum of 15768000s (6 months). A short max-age means browsers forget the HTTPS-only policy quickly, reducing protection between visits.
Compliance impact
PCI-DSS 4.0Req 6.4.1
Application security header configuration
How to fix this
1
Update header: Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload
2
Verify: curl -sI https://functionofbeauty.com | grep -i strict
4
Add optional security headers (Referrer-Policy, Permissions-Policy)
functionofbeauty.com has most security headers configured. Missing: Referrer-Policy, Permissions-Policy. These are best-practice additions that reduce the attack surface for client-side vulnerabilities.
How to fix this
1
Add: Referrer-Policy: strict-origin-when-cross-origin
2
Add: Permissions-Policy: camera=(), microphone=(), geolocation=()
3
Verify with: curl -sI https://functionofbeauty.com | grep -iE 'content-security|x-frame|x-content|referrer|permissions'
At a glance
Key data points from the scan.
TLS Version
TLSv1.3
TLSv1.3 negotiated with TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256-bit). Strong configuration with no deprecated protocols or weak ciphers detected.
DMARC Policy
p=none
Strengths: SPF record present; DKIM configured (selectors: google, s1, s2, mandrill). Issues: DMARC policy is 'none' (monitoring only, no enforcement); DMARC has no aggregate report URI (rua).
SPF Record
Present
v=spf1 ip4:52.35.242.183 include:_spf.google.com
Security Headers
3/5 present
Missing: Referrer-Policy, Permissions-Policy
HSTS
Not enabled
HSTS present but max-age is low (7889238s). Recommended minimum: 15768000 (6 months).
SSL Certificate
Valid
Strengths: Certificate valid, 78 days remaining; Issued by Google Trust Services.
DNSSEC
Not enabled
Strengths: 4 nameservers configured (ns-1190.awsdns-20.org., ns-1610.awsdns-09.co.uk., ns-431.awsdns-53.com., ns-576.awsdns-08.net.); 5 MX records present; Zone transfers properly restricted. Issues: DNSSEC not configured — DNS responses can be spoofed.