Skip to main content

Security report for abetterinternet.org

Internet Security Research Group · Technology · United States

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

80/100

Risk levelLow

0–100, higher is better. How it is calculated

The Internet Security Research Group (ISRG) is a nonprofit organization dedicated to improving Internet security and privacy by reducing barriers to secure communication. Their key services include providing free TLS certificates through Let's Encrypt, promoting memory safety in critical infrastructure via Prossimo, and offering privacy-preserving telemetry with Divvi Up. The organization is well-positioned in the technology nonprofit sector, supported by major industry sponsors such as Mozilla, Cisco, Google, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation. The website reflects a professional and trustworthy presence with comprehensive content and clear navigation. Technically, the website is built using the Hugo static site generator, leveraging modern libraries such as jQuery and Bootstrap for responsive design. The site performs well with fast loading times and excellent mobile optimization. However, some security best practices like explicit security headers and cookie consent mechanisms are missing, which could be improved to enhance compliance and security posture. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS and does not expose sensitive data or vulnerable libraries. The absence of a security policy, incident response contact, and vulnerability disclosure reduces transparency in security management. WHOIS data is unavailable or protected, which slightly reduces domain trustworthiness but is somewhat mitigated by the organization's reputable sponsors and clear nonprofit mission. Overall, the website is secure, professional, and privacy-conscious, with room for improvement in security headers, cookie consent, and transparency around incident response. The domain's incomplete WHOIS data warrants caution but does not significantly detract from the site's legitimacy given the strong external trust signals.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of abetterinternet.org. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 100 · Medium
Checks completed
7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

  1. (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
  2. (b) Incident handling: One indicator
  3. (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
  4. (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
  5. (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
  6. (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
  7. (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
  8. (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
  9. (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
  10. (j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside

This scan rated NIS2 with an earlier keyword method that is no longer shown; rescan for the per-article view. Risk management, continuity, supply chain, training, MFA, management oversight (Art. 20) and incident reporting (Art. 23) need internal evidence, and Guard cannot tell whether NIS2 applies to this organisation.

GDPR is indicative only, based on publicly visible signals: Articles 7, 12, 13 and 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive. Not a certification or legal assessment.

Priority findings

3 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • High

      No Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  2. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching abetterinternet.org

This scan found 16 issues across 6 checks. Monitoring re-runs those checks daily, emails you when something material changes and records each fix, so you can show progress.

Daily monitoring

Recommended

€25per month

  • TLS certificates and expiry
  • DNS records
  • SPF, DKIM and DMARC
  • Security headers
  • GDPR and NIS2 posture
  • Exposed services
  • Third-party trackers
  • Security score drift

Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.

Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

Full report

€39.90one-time

  • The complete analysis as a PDF you can cite
  • Email delivery with an unlock code
  • Lifetime access to this report

Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.

Results by check

Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.

How this score is calculated

The security score runs 0–100, higher is better. It is the plain average of the security checks that completed in this scan, each counted equally. A check that could not run is left out: it counts neither as a pass nor as a fail.

Counted in this score

SSL/TLS
75
Security headers
85
Email security
85
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
80

Not counted

  • NIS2 outside view: Re-weights evidence from the TLS, email, DNS, network and hygiene checks, so counting it would count that evidence twice. Shown on its own.
  • OffSeq Observations: An AI reading of the site, useful context but not reproducible evidence. Shown on its own.

Findings that cap the score at 49

Each of these is serious on its own, so while any is present the site cannot rate better than high risk, however good the other checks are.

  • The certificate is not trusted by browsers
  • The website is not served over HTTPS
  • A database, remote desktop, file-sharing or Telnet service is reachable from the internet
  • The page loads a script from a compromised source
  • The domain registration has expired
  • SPF authorises every server to send mail as the domain

Partial scans

When the site blocks Guard or most checks cannot run, the score covers only the checks that ran (usually DNS and email), is capped at 75 and is shown as partial, without a risk level.

Risk levels

  • Critical0–25
  • High26–49
  • Medium50–75
  • Low76–100

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

ISRG operates as a nonprofit focused on Internet security infrastructure and privacy-enhancing technologies. Their market positioning is strong due to flagship projects like Let's Encrypt, which serves over 500 million websites globally. Revenue streams are primarily from sponsorships and donations from major technology companies. The target customers include website operators, developers, and organizations seeking to improve Internet security. Growth indicators include expanding projects such as Prossimo and Divvi Up, and increasing community support evidenced by high-profile donations. The partnership ecosystem is robust, involving collaborations with Mozilla, Cisco, Google, and others, enhancing credibility and reach. Strategic observations highlight ISRG's role as a foundational entity in Internet security, leveraging open-source and community-driven models to drive adoption and impact.

Security posture

ISRG demonstrates a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, no visible vulnerabilities, and a privacy-respecting approach with minimal tracking. However, the lack of explicit security headers (e.g., CSP, HSTS) and absence of published security policies or incident response contacts indicate areas for improvement. Compliance with GDPR is suggested by the presence of a privacy policy but lacks a cookie consent mechanism, which may be a compliance gap. The organization does not publicly disclose vulnerability handling procedures or a security.txt file, limiting transparency. Overall, the security culture appears strong but could benefit from enhanced documentation and technical controls to align with best practices and regulatory requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options to strengthen defense against common web attacks.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner or mechanism to ensure compliance with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  3. Publish a detailed security policy and incident response plan on the website to improve transparency and preparedness.
  4. Create and maintain a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting and remediation of security issues.
  5. Enhance WHOIS data transparency if possible to improve domain trustworthiness and reduce suspicion related to privacy protection.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Internet Security Research Group
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Internet Security Research Group
Description
ISRG is a nonprofit organization focused on reducing financial, technological, and educational barriers to secure communication over the Internet.
Key services
Free TLS certificates via Let's Encrypt, Memory safety initiatives via Prossimo, Privacy-preserving telemetry via Divvi Up
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Hugo 0.130.0, jQuery, Bootstrap, FancyBox
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced (implied by og:url https)
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No vulnerable libraries detected

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
excellent
User experience
excellent
Content relevance
excellent
Navigation
excellent
Professionalism
excellent
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and clear navigation.
  2. Strong nonprofit branding with major industry sponsors.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly listed on the site.
  4. No cookie consent mechanism detected despite GDPR compliance claims.
  5. WHOIS data is unavailable or protected, limiting domain trust verification.
  6. No explicit security headers detected in HTML source.
  7. No analytics or tracking scripts detected, indicating privacy focus.
  8. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the Hugo static site generator, which provides a fast and secure foundation. It uses modern front-end libraries including jQuery, Bootstrap, and FancyBox for UI components and responsiveness. The site is well-optimized for mobile devices and SEO, with proper meta tags and Open Graph data for social sharing. Performance is fast due to static content delivery. There is no evidence of heavy analytics or tracking scripts, aligning with the organization's privacy focus. Technical risks are minimal, but the absence of explicit security headers and cookie consent mechanisms represent modernization opportunities to enhance security and compliance. Hosting provider details are not disclosed, but the site appears stable and performant.
Standards and sources

Reference chips under each finding point to the standard, regulation or specification the finding relates to. They are taken from the official datasets below and mapped conservatively: a finding with no defensible link shows none. NIS2 and GDPR references mark where a finding is relevant evidence, not a compliance verdict. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 binds digital infrastructure and digital service providers; for other entities it is the most detailed public reading of the Article 21 measures. WCAG, EN 301 549, European Accessibility Act and Web Accessibility Directive references name the requirement an automated accessibility rule relates to; they are not a conformance verdict.

Retrieved 2026-10-25

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 80/100Low24 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with abetterinternet.org. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.

Overall rating
Select a rating
4000 characters remaining

We’ll email you to confirm your review and keep your details private.

Community rating

No published reviews yet. Be the first to review abetterinternet.org.

Feedback on this report

Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.

Overall report quality
Select a rating
2000 characters remaining

We only use your feedback to improve Guard reports. Contact details are never shared.