Skip to main content

Security report for alpine-rescue.org

International Commission for Alpine Rescue · Other · N/a

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

Security score

74/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The International Commission for Alpine Rescue (ICAR) operates as a global non-profit organization dedicated to improving mountain rescue services and safety through knowledge dissemination and international cooperation. The website serves as a professional platform for members and partners, offering news, recommendations, event information, and organizational details. The presence of numerous reputable partners and sponsors underscores its established position in the alpine rescue community. Technically, the website employs modern web technologies including HTTPS, CSRF protection, and Matomo analytics configured for privacy. The site is well-structured, mobile-optimized, and provides a good user experience with clear navigation and relevant content. However, the absence of explicit security headers and cookie consent mechanisms indicates areas for improvement in security and privacy compliance. From a security perspective, the site demonstrates a solid baseline with encrypted connections and privacy-conscious analytics. The lack of WHOIS transparency and missing registrar details slightly diminish trust but do not critically undermine legitimacy given the professional content and partner endorsements. No critical vulnerabilities or security issues were detected in the accessible content. Overall, ICAR's website presents a trustworthy and authoritative resource for alpine rescue stakeholders, with recommendations to enhance security headers, privacy notices, and WHOIS transparency to further strengthen its security posture and compliance.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of alpine-rescue.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 384-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 alpine-rescue.org

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
65
Security headers
80
Email security
70
DNS health
75
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

ICAR is positioned as an essential international non-profit entity within the alpine rescue sector, targeting mountain rescue organizations and related stakeholders globally. Its business model focuses on knowledge sharing, safety improvement, and fostering international collaboration rather than commercial revenue generation. The organization benefits from a broad partnership ecosystem including manufacturers, technology providers, and rescue organizations, which enhances its credibility and reach. The website content and structure support its mission and provide clear pathways for member engagement and information dissemination. Growth indicators include active event promotion and calls for proposals, reflecting ongoing community involvement and development.

Security posture

The website exhibits a mature security posture with mandatory HTTPS, CSRF token implementation, and privacy-respecting analytics (Matomo with cookies disabled). However, the absence of common security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options represents a gap that could expose the site to certain web-based attacks. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, which limits transparency and preparedness communication. The incomplete WHOIS data reduces domain trustworthiness, though no direct security threats or vulnerabilities were identified in the site content. Overall, the security posture is good but could be improved by adopting additional headers, publishing security policies, and enhancing domain registration transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Implement standard security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to mitigate common web vulnerabilities.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner or mechanism to comply with privacy regulations and improve user transparency.
  3. Publish a dedicated incident response and vulnerability disclosure page or security.txt file to enhance security communication.
  4. Improve WHOIS data transparency by ensuring registrar and registrant information is publicly available and accurate.
  5. Regularly review and update privacy policies and cookie practices to maintain GDPR and other privacy compliance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
International Commission for Alpine Rescue
Description
ICAR provides a platform for mountain rescue and related organizations to disseminate knowledge with the prime goal of improving mountain rescue services and their safety. ICAR is an independent, worldwide organization that respects its members and promotes international cooperation.
Key services
Dissemination of mountain rescue knowledge, Promotion of international cooperation, Organization of congresses and meetings, Providing recommendations and news related to alpine rescue
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Matomo Analytics, JavaScript, CSS, HTML5
Frameworks
Up (Unpoly) framework
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • CSRF tokens present in meta tags
  • Cookie usage disabled in Matomo analytics

Analytics and tracking

Services
Matomo
Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Matomo
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. WHOIS data is incomplete, limiting domain trust verification.
  3. Website uses HTTPS and includes CSRF tokens indicating security awareness.
  4. No explicit privacy or cookie consent banners detected, but privacy policy is present.
  5. Multiple reputable partners and sponsors are displayed, enhancing trust.
  6. No direct company contact emails or phone numbers found; contact via forms and articles only.
  7. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure page found.
  8. Website content is professional, relevant, and well-structured.
  9. Matomo analytics used with cookies disabled, indicating privacy-conscious tracking.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern web standards with HTML5, CSS, and JavaScript, leveraging the Up (Unpoly) framework for dynamic page updates. Matomo analytics is used for visitor tracking with cookies disabled, reflecting a privacy-conscious approach. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, with responsive design and clear navigation. Performance is moderate, with asynchronous loading of scripts and optimized images. No major technical debt or outdated technologies were detected. Hosting provider details are not explicitly available. Opportunities exist to enhance technical security by adding missing HTTP headers and improving privacy consent mechanisms.
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. 71/100Medium29 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with alpine-rescue.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 alpine-rescue.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.