Is shop.garena.sg safe to use as a vendor?

shop.garena.sg scored 52/100 on LynxRadar's security posture assessment. The domain has significant security gaps that should be addressed. 5 checks passed, 7 warnings, 3 critical issues across 16 passive checks including TLS, DMARC, security headers, breaches, and CVEs.

What TLS version does shop.garena.sg use?

shop.garena.sg uses TLSv1.2 with ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256. TLSv1.2 negotiated. Issues: TLS 1.2 negotiated (1.3 preferred).

Does shop.garena.sg have SPF configured?

No. No SPF record found for shop.garena.sg.

Does shop.garena.sg have security headers configured?

shop.garena.sg has 0 of 5 recommended security headers. Missing: CSP, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, Referrer-Policy, Permissions-Policy.

Has shop.garena.sg been involved in a data breach?

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

Does shop.garena.sg have known CVE vulnerabilities?

Detected technologies: Express. No version information exposed — CVE matching not possible (this is good practice).

Is shop.garena.sg's SSL certificate valid?

Yes. Strengths: Certificate valid, 66 days remaining; Issued by DigiCert Inc; 32 certificates logged in CT; Certificates from 3 CAs: COMODO CA Limited, DigiCert Inc, SSL Corporation.

shop.garena.sg Security Report — Grade F (52/100)

Q: Does shop.garena.sg have DMARC configured?

Yes. shop.garena.sg's DMARC policy is set to 'none'. SPF record: no. Strengths: DMARC pct=100 — policy applies to all mail; Aggregate reports (rua) configured; Forensic reports (ruf) configured. Issues: DMARC policy is 'none' (monitoring only, no enforcement); 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 shop.garena.sg use HSTS?

No. Strict-Transport-Security header is missing. Connections can be downgraded to HTTP via man-in-the-middle attacks. If this domain is in the browser HSTS preload list, browsers may still enforce HTTPS — but the header should be present for full coverage.

Q: Does shop.garena.sg have DNSSEC enabled?

No. Strengths: 4 nameservers configured (ns-1695.awsdns-19.co.uk, ns-18.awsdns-02.com, ns-885.awsdns-46.net, ns-1499.awsdns-59.org); NS records span 4 providers (co.uk, awsdns-02.com, awsdns-46.net, awsdns-59.org) — genuine redundancy; SOA record present and MNAME consistent with NS set; 5 MX record(s) present; Zone transfers properly restricted on all nameservers; Address records present: 1 A record(s). Issues: DNSSEC not configured — DNS responses can be spoofed or tampered with in transit (DNS cache poisoning).

Trust rating

Fail · 52/100

Procurement snapshot

1 critical finding identified — these point to architectural gaps, not just configuration tweaks.

Strengths

MX Records & Mail Provider

Known Breaches

Subprocessors & Tech Stack

CVE Exposure

Questions to ask

Confirm email authentication (SPF/DKIM/DMARC) rollout plans

Estimated remediation effort: 3–6 days

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

Trust Score Trend

→ No change 1 scan · Last scanned October 15, 2026

Score

100 75 50 25 0

shop.garena.sg

52/100

Compliance & Certifications

Not yet verified

SOC 2 Type II

Audit report not on file

3rd party · AICPA

ISO 27001

Certificate not on file

3rd party · accredited body

GDPR

DPA not on file

Self-reported

CCPA

Self-reported

Incident History

No public breaches on record

Security Posture

9 items need attention

5 passed

0 of 1 fixed

All 1 critical issue marked as fixed

Re-scan to confirm and update your score.

Turn on email authentication (SPF, DKIM, DMARC)

DMARC / Email Security

1–2 days Critical

This exposes customers, partners, and employees to phishing attacks that impersonate your brand. Right now, anyone can send an email that looks like it came from [email protected] — no password or hack required. This is how the vast majority of phishing scams that impersonate a company work, and it can damage your reputation with customers even though your systems were never touched. Missing: DMARC enforcement (policy is "none"), SPF.

NIST SP 800-177r1§4

Trustworthy Email recommends SPF, DKIM and DMARC for every email domain

ISO 27001:2022A.5.14

Information transfer controls cover email

CISA BOD 18-01DMARC

Requires DMARC p=reject on US federal email domains

How to fix this

1Add an SPF record in your DNS settings (you're using Google Workspace — see https://knowledge.workspace.google.com/admin/security/set-up-dkim). This is a line of text that tells other mail servers which servers are allowed to send email as you.

v=spf1 include:_spf.google.com ~all

v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; fo=1; rua=mailto:[email protected]; ruf=mailto:[email protected]

2If DKIM signing isn't on yet (we can't confirm it from outside): Turn on DKIM signing in Google Workspace — see https://knowledge.workspace.google.com/admin/security/set-up-dkim for the exact steps. It gives you a record to add in your DNS settings (you're using Google Workspace — see https://knowledge.workspace.google.com/admin/security/set-up-dkim).

3Change your DMARC policy from "none" to "quarantine" in your DNS settings (you're using Google Workspace — see https://knowledge.workspace.google.com/admin/security/set-up-dkim) so failing mail goes to spam instead of the inbox. This is your current record with only the policy changed:

4After 2–4 weeks, check the DMARC reports for anything legitimate that got flagged, then tighten the policy from quarantine to reject.

Email authentication guide

Report unlocked.

View all 5 passed checks

MX Records & Mail Provider

Known Breaches

Subprocessors & Tech Stack

CVE Exposure

Certificate Hygiene

Couldn't check: Malware / Phishing Blocklist — the check didn't complete (the site blocked or timed out our scanner, or a data source was unavailable), so this isn'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

Appears in

Vendors graded F

172 companies · LynxRadar ranking

Blocking Issues

p=none

Strengths: DMARC pct=100 — policy applies to all mail; Aggregate reports (rua) configured; Forensic reports (ruf) configured. Issues: DMARC policy is 'none' (monitoring only, no enforcement); 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: ★★★★☆

Not enabled

Strict-Transport-Security header is missing. Connections can be downgraded to HTTP via man-in-the-middle attacks. If this domain is in the browser HSTS preload list, browsers may still enforce HTTPS — but the header should be present for full coverage.

Likelihood: ★★★☆☆

Impact: ★★★★☆

0/5 present

Missing: CSP, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, Referrer-Policy, Permissions-Policy

Likelihood: ★★★☆☆

Impact: ★★★☆☆

Missing

No SPF record found.

Likelihood: ★★★★★

Impact: ★★★★☆

Medium Priority

Warn

Issues: No MTA-STS configured — email in transit is vulnerable to TLS downgrade attacks; sending servers cannot verify your mail server requires TLS; No TLSRPT record (_smtp._tls) — TLS delivery failures won't be reported to the domain owner.

Likelihood: ★★☆☆☆

Impact: ★★★☆☆

Not enabled

Strengths: 4 nameservers configured (ns-1695.awsdns-19.co.uk, ns-18.awsdns-02.com, ns-885.awsdns-46.net, ns-1499.awsdns-59.org); NS records span 4 providers (co.uk, awsdns-02.com, awsdns-46.net, awsdns-59.org) — genuine redundancy; SOA record present and MNAME consistent with NS set; 5 MX record(s) present; Zone transfers properly restricted on all nameservers; Address records present: 1 A record(s). Issues: DNSSEC not configured — DNS responses can be spoofed or tampered with in transit (DNS cache poisoning).

Likelihood: ★★☆☆☆

Impact: ★★★☆☆

Warn

Strengths: 4 cookie(s) analyzed; All cookies have Secure flag; All cookies have SameSite attribute. Issues: 4/4 cookie(s) missing HttpOnly flag (source, region, language...).

Likelihood: ★★★☆☆

Impact: ★★★☆☆

Best Practice

Warn

No CAA records found in the DNS tree for this domain. Without CAA, any Certificate Authority can issue certificates for this domain. Adding CAA records restricts issuance to authorised CAs only, reducing the risk of misissued certificates.

Likelihood: ★☆☆☆☆

Impact: ★☆☆☆☆

TLSv1.2

TLSv1.2 negotiated. Issues: TLS 1.2 negotiated (1.3 preferred).

Likelihood: ★☆☆☆☆

Impact: ★☆☆☆☆

Warn

No security.txt found. Publishing a security.txt at /.well-known/security.txt is the industry standard (RFC 9116) for vulnerability disclosure policies. Its absence may indicate a less mature security program.

Likelihood: ★☆☆☆☆

Impact: ★☆☆☆☆

Warn

Strengths: TLS 1.2 supported; TLS 1.2 supported (consider enabling TLS 1.3). Protocol support: TLS 1.3: No, TLS 1.2: Yes, TLS 1.1: No, TLS 1.0: No.