Skip to main content

Security report for alistapart.com

A List Apart · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

59/100

Risk levelMedium

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

A List Apart is a well-established online publication founded in 1998, focusing on web design, development, and content strategy. It serves a specialized audience of web professionals, offering high-quality articles, events, and educational resources. The website demonstrates a mature digital presence with consistent branding and partnerships with reputable organizations such as Northwestern SPS and A Book Apart. Technically, the site is built on WordPress, leveraging modern JavaScript libraries and analytics tools, hosted by Pressable, and secured with HTTPS. While the site lacks some advanced security headers and cookie consent mechanisms, it maintains a good security posture overall. The absence of explicit contact emails and phone numbers suggests a preference for contact via web forms, aligning with privacy best practices. Overall, the site is professional, trustworthy, and content-rich, with minor areas for improvement in privacy compliance and security transparency.

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

6 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

  3. 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 Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1
    • 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 alistapart.com

This scan found 29 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
42
Security headers
45
Email security
55
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
59

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

The website occupies a niche market in the web design and development industry, targeting professionals seeking authoritative content and community engagement. Its business model revolves around content publishing, event hosting, and partnerships, with monetization through memberships and collaborations. The site's longevity and consistent content updates indicate stable operations and a loyal audience. Strategic partnerships with educational institutions and related media enhance its market position and credibility. The lack of direct sales or e-commerce features suggests a focus on thought leadership and community building rather than direct product sales. Growth opportunities may include expanding educational offerings and enhancing privacy and security features to meet evolving regulatory requirements.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate, ensuring encrypted communications. The domain is secured with clientTransferProhibited status, reducing the risk of unauthorized transfers. However, DNSSEC is not enabled, which could improve DNS security. No explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options were detected, representing an area for enhancement. The site does not expose sensitive data in its HTML content and uses reputable third-party services for analytics and monetization. Incident response and vulnerability disclosure policies are not publicly documented, which could impact transparency and trust. Overall, the security posture is solid but could benefit from implementing additional headers, DNSSEC, and formal security policies.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC to enhance domain name system security.
  2. Implement standard security headers like Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Add a cookie consent banner or mechanism to comply with privacy regulations.
  4. Publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to improve transparency.
  5. Consider adding a terms of service page to clarify user agreements and legal protections.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
A List Apart
Description
A List Apart explores the design, development, and meaning of web content, with a special focus on web standards and best practices.
Key services
Publishing articles on web design and development, Hosting events, Providing educational resources, Partnerships with related organizations
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, jQuery, Prism.js, Google Analytics, Jetpack, Coil Web Monetization
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Domain status clientTransferProhibited
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No vulnerable libraries detected

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Jetpack Stats, Gauges
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Jetpack Stats, Gauges
Marketing tools
Jetpack
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professional publication focused on web design and development.
  2. Content is rich, well-structured, and updated regularly.
  3. No signs of malicious or suspicious activity.
  4. Use of modern web technologies and monetization via Coil.
  5. No explicit contact emails or phone numbers publicly listed; contact via form.
  6. No cookie consent banner detected despite privacy policy presence.
  7. Security headers not explicitly detected in HTML content.
  8. No terms of service page found.
  9. Strong branding and consistent design.
  10. Partnerships with reputable organizations enhance credibility.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a WordPress CMS platform, utilizing jQuery and Prism.js for frontend functionality and syntax highlighting. It integrates Google Analytics, Jetpack Stats, and Gauges for user tracking and analytics. Monetization is supported via Coil Web Monetization plugin. Hosting is provided by Pressable, a reputable managed WordPress host. The site demonstrates good mobile responsiveness and accessibility features, with a clean and consistent design. Performance is moderate, with potential improvements possible through optimization of scripts and assets. The absence of advanced security headers and cookie consent mechanisms indicates some technical debt in security and privacy compliance. Overall, the technical infrastructure is stable and modern but could be enhanced with additional security and privacy features.
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. 60/100Medium37 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with alistapart.com. 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 alistapart.com.

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.