Skip to main content

Security report for accce.gov.au

Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation · Government · Australia

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

74/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation (ACCCE) is a government-led initiative under the Australian Federal Police focused on combating online child sexual exploitation. The website serves as a public-facing platform providing resources, reporting mechanisms, and awareness campaigns to protect children and support affected individuals. It collaborates with multiple stakeholders including law enforcement, non-government organizations, and private industry to create a cohesive national response. The site is well-positioned as a trusted authority in its domain with a clear mission and comprehensive content tailored to a broad audience including parents, carers, and professionals. Technically, the website is built on the Drupal CMS platform and employs modern web technologies such as Google Analytics for tracking, Google reCAPTCHA v3 for form security, and GTranslate for multilingual support. The site demonstrates good mobile optimization, accessibility, and SEO practices, although performance is moderate. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforced and no visible vulnerabilities, but could be improved by adding explicit security headers and a formal security policy or vulnerability disclosure mechanism. Overall, the website exhibits a high level of professionalism, trustworthiness, and compliance with government standards. The lack of explicit cookie consent and some security headers are minor gaps. The WHOIS data is limited due to privacy policies typical for government domains but aligns with the website's legitimacy. Strategic recommendations include enhancing privacy compliance, publishing security policies, and improving security headers to further strengthen trust and protection.

Scanned

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. Security headers

    Security headers are instructions your web server sends to every visitor’s browser. Missing ones leave visitors more exposed to attacks such as clickjacking and injected scripts.

    • High

      Missing Content-Security-Policy header

      Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

      What to do: Implement a Content-Security-Policy appropriate for your application

      • ASVS V3.4.3
      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Content-Security-Policy: default-src 'self'; form-action 'self'; base-uri 'self'; object-src 'none';…

  2. 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

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

Keep watching accce.gov.au

This scan found 19 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
100
Security headers
55
Email security
70
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
74

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

ACCCE operates as a government entity with a clear mandate to counter child exploitation in Australia. Its market position is authoritative and essential within the public safety and law enforcement sectors. The business model is non-commercial, focusing on public service, awareness, and collaboration. Key competitive advantages include government backing, extensive partnerships, and a comprehensive approach integrating multiple agencies. Revenue streams are not applicable as it is government funded. Target customers include the general public, parents, carers, law enforcement, and support organizations. Growth indicators include expanding partnerships and increasing public engagement. The partnership ecosystem includes Australian Federal Police, state and territory agencies, and NGOs. Operationally, the website supports outreach, reporting, and education, reinforcing its strategic role in national child protection efforts.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with HTTPS enforced and use of Google reCAPTCHA v3 to protect forms from abuse. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options represents an area for improvement. There is no published security policy or incident response contact information, which could enhance transparency and preparedness. Compliance with privacy regulations is partial; while a privacy policy exists, cookie consent mechanisms are lacking. Incident response readiness and vulnerability disclosure practices are not evident. Overall, the site is secure but could benefit from formalizing security governance and enhancing privacy compliance to meet best practices.

Recommendations

  1. Implement explicit security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to strengthen browser security.
  2. Add a visible cookie consent banner or mechanism to improve privacy compliance and user transparency.
  3. Publish a formal security policy and incident response contact information to enhance trust and preparedness.
  4. Consider creating and publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  5. Regularly review and update third-party scripts and libraries to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation
Description
The Australian Federal Police (AFP) led Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation (ACCCE) is a government initiative to combat online child sexual exploitation by collaborating with federal, state, territory, non-government agencies and private industry.
Key services
Child exploitation reporting and triage, Public awareness and education, Support and prevention resources, Collaboration with law enforcement and partners
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Drupal CMS, Google Analytics, Google reCAPTCHA v3, GTranslate for language translation, Modernizr
Frameworks
Drupal
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA v3 on forms
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No vulnerable libraries detected

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a government initiative focused on combating child exploitation in Australia.
  2. Content is comprehensive, well-structured, and professionally presented.
  3. No signs of malicious or suspicious activity detected.
  4. Use of modern web technologies and security best practices observed.
  5. Social media presence and external partnerships enhance trust and outreach.
  6. No explicit privacy or cookie consent banner detected, which could be improved.
  7. WHOIS data is limited due to privacy policies but consistent with government domain norms.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is powered by Drupal CMS, leveraging modern JavaScript libraries and Google services for analytics and security. It uses Google reCAPTCHA v3 for spam prevention and GTranslate for multilingual support. The site is mobile optimized and accessible with good SEO metadata. Performance is moderate, likely due to multiple external scripts and analytics integrations. There is no evidence of outdated or vulnerable libraries. The infrastructure appears stable and professionally managed, consistent with a government-hosted site. Opportunities exist to optimize performance further and enhance security headers. The technical stack supports the site's mission effectively with room for incremental improvements.
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

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with accce.gov.au. 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 accce.gov.au.

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.