Global Performance
6/6 locations ✓High global latency — average 685ms across 6 locations, fastest from Amsterdam (121ms), slowest from New York (1309ms). No CDN detected. Cache-Control disables caching (no-store). 5 locations above the 500ms target.
Audit overview
Compliance needs attention; the rest of the categories are in good shape.
Fix Priority Matrix
5 findingsQuick Wins
3High impact, low effort — start here.
Strategic
2High impact, requires investment.
Easy Improvements
0Small gains, minimal effort.
Nothing in this quadrant — good news.
Deprioritize
0Low impact, high effort — do last.
Nothing in this quadrant — good news.
Screenshots
Top Priorities (5)
'unsafe-inline' found in script source
Unsafe value (unsafe-inline, unsafe-eval) in script-src defeats CSP's main protection — XSS injections can execute again.
No <main> landmark found
Without a <main> landmark, screen-reader users can't skip past the navigation to the page content — every page starts with re-reading the menu.
1 link(s) open in a new tab without rel=noopener
target="_blank" without rel="noopener" lets the destination tab navigate the original via window.opener -- a reverse-tabnabbing phishing primitive.
2 render-blocking <script src> tag(s) without async/defer
Performance issues directly impact user engagement and conversion rates.
51 third-party resources (87% of weight)
Informational: third-party resource count and their share of page weight. High share caps perf gains from frontend optimization.
Business case
What fixing the audit's findings is worth -- and what ignoring them keeps costing.
Return on investment
PLN 1,263 investment → PLN 9,580/month returns + EUR 20,500,000 risk avoided
Figures combine localized regulatory fine ceilings, search/conversion value priced against local CPC, and bandwidth waste estimates. Results depend on implementation quality and audience composition. Not legal or financial advice.
Conversion barriers
5 barrier(s) likely increasing bounce by ~17%.
- Page loads in 2.8sEvery additional 100ms above 2.5s costs conversions — you're 329ms over→ Target <2.5s LCP: defer non-critical scripts and optimize the hero image
- No Content-Security-Policy headerHigher XSS blast radius — one compromised script can exfiltrate the checkout form→ Ship a reporting-only CSP first, then enforce once violations are clean
- No structured dataNo rich-result eligibility in Google — lower SERP CTR vs competitors with stars and prices→ Add JSON-LD for your page type (Product, Article, FAQPage, LocalBusiness, …)
- No skip-to-content linkKeyboard and screen-reader users must tab through the entire header on every page→ Add a visible-on-focus <a href="#main">Skip to content</a> as the first focusable element
- 2 broken link(s) on the pageClicks land on 404s — trust drops and the session often ends→ Fix or remove the broken destinations surfaced on the Content tab
Preliminary CRO audit — each barrier links to the tab with detailed analysis.
Remediation cost
Start here for the best return on investment
Cost by category
Cost by effort level
Adjust assumptions
Team composition
Multiplier applied to dev hours to reflect QA, design, and PM overhead. Use Dev only for solo work; Full team for projects with formal review processes.
Rates reflect fully-loaded developer cost including overhead
Warning:Cost of inaction
Compliance Risk
€20.500.000
- No privacy policy link detectedRODO: EUR 10.000 – EUR 20.000.000
- Privacy Policy not detectedRODO: EUR 10.000 – EUR 20.000.000
- No <main> landmark foundEAA: EUR 1.000 – EUR 500.000
Bounce-Rate Cost
PLN 8 427 /mo
+16.9pp bounce · ~1,685 lost visitors/mo
CPC: PLN 5.00
Bandwidth Waste
PLN 1,90 /mo
5947.4 MB/mo × 0.320 PLN/GB
- Optimize transfer: save ~595 KB per page loadSaves PLN 1,90/mo
Compliance figures represent the statutory maximum fine for the most severe triggered category, capped per regulation — not the sum of per-finding penalties. Based on published regulatory fine ranges. This is not legal advice.
Unique monthly visitors from your analytics
Purchases, signups, or key actions
Optional — for revenue estimation
more engaged visitors from reduced bounce
Fix 2 critical issues to capture this value
How this is calculated
Based on Google/Deloitte research ("Milliseconds Make Millions") showing a ~7% bounce rate increase per additional second of LCP above the 2.5s "Good" threshold.
Your site's LCP: → estimated after fixes.
These are estimates based on industry research — actual results vary
Your data stays in your browser — nothing is sent to our servers
Lighthouse
Mobile
First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.
1.70 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
2.83 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
142 ms
Cumulative Layout Shift Cumulative Layout Shift — measures visual stability. How much the page layout shifts during loading. Under 0.1 is good.
0.033
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
2.24 s
Time to Interactive Time to Interactive — how long until the page is fully interactive and responds to user input. Under 3.8s is good.
4.83 s
Desktop
First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.
1.06 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
1.53 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
0 ms
Cumulative Layout Shift Cumulative Layout Shift — measures visual stability. How much the page layout shifts during loading. Under 0.1 is good.
0.094
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
1.13 s
Time to Interactive Time to Interactive — how long until the page is fully interactive and responds to user input. Under 3.8s is good.
1.53 s
Categories
8Performance
2 render-blocking <script src> tag(s) without async/defer
Security
'unsafe-inline' found in script source
Accessibility
No <main> landmark found
SEO
All checks pass
Infrastructure
All checks pass
Compliance
All checks pass
Content
All checks pass
Sustainability
All checks pass
How you compare
Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.
Top 10% of Font Awesome sites score 85+ on Compliance; you're at 66 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.
Technology stack
DataLife Engine, on PHP, hosted on Apache HTTP Server, with Nginx CDN
Stack Architecture
DataLife Engine 
Font Awesome 
Google Font API HSTS 
Open Graph 
Priority Hints 
RSS 
jQuery 3.7.1
jQuery UI 1.13.2
PHP 
Nginx 
Apache HTTP Server All Detected Technologies (12)
Nginx is a web server that can also be used as a reverse proxy, load balancer, mail proxy and HTTP cache.
Apache is a free and open-source cross-platform web server software.
PHP is a general-purpose scripting language used for web development.
Font Awesome is a font and icon toolkit based on CSS and Less.
Google Font API is a web service that supports open-source font files that can be used on your web designs.
HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) informs browsers that the site should only be accessed using HTTPS.
Open Graph is a protocol that is used to integrate any web page into the social graph.
Priority Hints exposes a mechanism for developers to signal a relative priority for browsers to consider when fetching resources.
RSS is a family of web feed formats used to publish frequently updated works—such as blog entries, news headlines, audio, and video—in a standardized format.
jQuery is a JavaScript library which is a free, open-source software designed to simplify HTML DOM tree traversal and manipulation, as well as event handling, CSS animation, and Ajax.
jQuery UI is a collection of GUI widgets, animated visual effects, and themes implemented with jQuery, Cascading Style Sheets, and HTML.
Observations (2)
No build tool detected
A framework (Font Awesome) was detected but no bundler was identified. The build tool may not be detectable from output patterns, or the site may use the framework's built-in bundler.
Complex technology stack detected
12 technologies identified. A complex stack increases maintenance burden and attack surface. Consider whether all components are actively needed.
Show your score
Drop this badge on your README, marketing site, or status page. It auto-updates every time the audit re-runs and links back to this report.
This badge auto-updates with your latest scan result.
[](https://beavercheck.com/results/df5d4f5c-fe51-491a-859d-79a9f630d0dd)<a href="https://beavercheck.com/results/df5d4f5c-fe51-491a-859d-79a9f630d0dd"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Flegalporno.net" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Flegalporno.netExport & share
Download the audit, share with your team, or grab a fix plan ready to copy into your tracker.
Copies markdown to clipboard
Fix Plan
Three-week roadmap to ship the audit's findings, with one-click copy targets for your tracker.
Three-week fix plan
3 sprints · 8h total → projected A (90)
Sprint 1: Quick Wins
+4Highest ROI — low effort, high impact
- · No <main> landmark found
- · 51 third-party resources (87% of weight)
- · 1 link(s) open in a new tab without rel=noopener
Sprint 2: Core Fixes
+1Medium effort, high structural impact
- · 2 render-blocking <script src> tag(s) without async/defer
Sprint 3: Strategic Improvements
+2Higher effort, long-term payoff
- · 'unsafe-inline' found in script source