Skip to main content

Security report for alternet.org

Alternet.org · Media · N/a

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

Security score

79/100

Risk levelLow

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

Alternet.org is a progressive media platform specializing in breaking news, political analysis, and investigative journalism. It serves a general audience interested in in-depth reporting and progressive viewpoints. The website leverages a modern technical infrastructure including JavaScript frameworks, advertising networks, and consent management platforms to deliver content effectively. While the site is well-designed and mobile-optimized, it lacks explicit privacy and security policy disclosures, which could be improved to enhance user trust. The security posture is solid with HTTPS and service workers but would benefit from additional security headers and published incident response information. Overall, Alternet.org presents a professional and credible media presence with moderate risk due to limited domain transparency and privacy policy visibility.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
70/ 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 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

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

Keep watching alternet.org

This scan found 18 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
72
Security headers
80
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
70
Average
79

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

Alternet.org operates in the media sector with a focus on progressive and investigative journalism. Its business model includes advertising revenue supported by multiple ad networks and user engagement tools such as push notifications and subscription/donation prompts. The site maintains a consistent brand and content quality, targeting politically engaged readers. The lack of detailed WHOIS data and privacy policy reduces transparency but is common in media businesses. The platform uses a variety of marketing and analytics tools to optimize audience reach and monetization. No direct partnerships or subsidiaries were identified from the data provided.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses a consent management platform compliant with GDPR frameworks, indicating a baseline of privacy awareness. However, explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options are not detected, which could expose the site to certain web-based attacks. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found in the HTML content. The absence of a published security policy or incident response contacts limits the ability to assess incident readiness. Overall, the security posture is moderate with room for improvement in transparency and header implementation.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and make it easily accessible on the website.
  2. Implement and configure standard security headers including CSP, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Provide clear security policy and incident response contact information to improve trust and compliance.
  4. Add a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all visitors.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Alternet.org
Description
Breaking news, political news, and investigative news reporting from AlterNet's team of journalists and prize-winning investigators.
Key services
news reporting, political analysis, investigative journalism
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Google Analytics, Taboola, OneSignal, Prebid.js, Amazon Ads, InMobi CMP, RebelMouse platform, Service Workers, FontAwesome, Google Fonts
Frameworks
RebelMouse
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Service Worker registered
  • Consent management platform (InMobi CMP) implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Chartbeat, Quantserve
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
Amazon Ads, Taboola, Bounce Exchange, InMobi, JustPremium, Quantserve, Google Ad Manager
Tracking pixels
Taboola, Bounce Exchange, Quantserve, Chartbeat, OneSignal, InMobi CMP
Marketing tools
Tinypass, Pushnami
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website is a media/news platform focused on progressive and investigative journalism
  2. Content is accessible and not blocked by WAF or security challenges
  3. WHOIS data is unavailable or protected, limiting domain transparency
  4. Site uses multiple advertising and tracking technologies
  5. Privacy and terms policies are not clearly linked or found
  6. No explicit contact or security policy information found
  7. Good technical implementation with modern JS libraries and service workers
  8. Moderate security posture with HTTPS and consent management but missing explicit security headers
  9. Content is safe for general audiences with no adult or NSFW material
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the RebelMouse platform, utilizing modern JavaScript libraries and frameworks. It integrates multiple third-party services for advertising, analytics, and user engagement, including Google Analytics, Taboola, Amazon Ads, and OneSignal. The site uses service workers for offline capabilities and performance improvements. Fonts are loaded from Google Fonts, and FontAwesome icons are used for UI elements. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and structured data in JSON-LD format. However, some technical debt is indicated by the lack of explicit security headers and limited accessibility 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

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with alternet.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 alternet.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.