Skip to main content

Security report for amnesty.org

Amnesty International · Non-profit · 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

Amnesty International is a globally recognized non-profit organization dedicated to human rights advocacy, with a presence in over 150 countries and a membership exceeding 10 million people. The website reflects this mission with comprehensive content on campaigns, education, and activism, supported by a professional and consistent brand presentation. The organization leverages modern web technologies including WordPress and WooCommerce to facilitate engagement and donations. Social media integration is robust, enhancing outreach and community building. Technically, the website is well-constructed with modern frameworks and libraries such as React and WooCommerce, ensuring a responsive and accessible user experience. Privacy and cookie policies are clearly presented with active consent mechanisms, demonstrating compliance with GDPR and related regulations. Performance is moderate, with good mobile optimization and SEO practices. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and includes standard security headers, though explicit security policies and incident response contacts are not publicly available. No vulnerabilities or suspicious elements were detected in the content or scripts. WHOIS data is unavailable due to privacy protection, which is justified for a large non-profit entity. Overall, the site exhibits a strong security posture and trustworthy digital presence. Strategically, the organization should consider publishing detailed security policies and vulnerability disclosure information to enhance transparency and trust. Regular audits of third-party scripts and continued adherence to privacy regulations will further strengthen their security and compliance stance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
85/ 100 · Low
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 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
    • 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 amnesty.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
52
Security headers
85
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
85
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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention amnesty.org, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
16,147
Employees
75
Customers
15,967
Third parties
105
Weak passwords
13%

Latest record dated 2026-06-14 · 61 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for amnesty.org.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • –correo.es.amnesty.org2026-06-14
  • –soporte.es.amnesty.org2026-06-05
  • –nube.es.amnesty.org2026-06-02
  • –soporte.es.amnesty.org2026-05-29
  • –password.es.amnesty.org2026-05-26

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

Amnesty International holds a leading position in the global human rights advocacy sector, operating as a large non-profit with extensive international reach. Its business model focuses on membership, donations, education, and campaigning. The organization benefits from a strong brand and trust signals including verified social media accounts and comprehensive policy disclosures. The website supports multiple languages, indicating a broad target audience. Partnerships and subsidiary domains were not identified in the provided data, suggesting a centralized digital presence. The organization’s growth is supported by active engagement tools and educational resources, positioning it well for sustained influence and impact.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, cookie consent mechanisms, and use of security headers. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected. However, the absence of a public security policy, incident response contact information, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms represents a compliance gap. The site’s use of modern frameworks and regular updates (evidenced by recent content modification dates) indicates ongoing maintenance. To improve, Amnesty International should publish explicit security and incident response policies and consider implementing a security.txt file to facilitate responsible vulnerability reporting.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and compliance frameworks.
  2. Implement a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to enable responsible reporting.
  3. Provide clear incident response contact channels such as security@ or abuse@ email addresses.
  4. Conduct regular third-party script audits to mitigate supply chain risks.
  5. Enhance transparency by detailing data retention policies and user privacy rights.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Amnesty International
Description
Amnesty International is a global movement of more than 10 million people who campaign to end abuses of human rights worldwide.
Key services
Human rights campaigns, Research and reporting, Education and training, Membership and activism
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, WooCommerce, React, Google Tag Manager, Civic Cookie Control
Frameworks
WooCommerce
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of modern JS libraries

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager, PageSense
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
PageSense
Transparency
good

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 navigation
  2. Strong presence of privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms
  3. No direct contact emails or phone numbers publicly listed, contact via forms
  4. Use of modern web technologies and CMS (WordPress with WooCommerce)
  5. No signs of suspicious or malicious content
  6. Social media presence is extensive and consistent
  7. WHOIS data unavailable, likely due to privacy protection
  8. No explicit security policy or incident response information found
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with WooCommerce for e-commerce capabilities, supplemented by React for dynamic content rendering. It uses Google Tag Manager and PageSense for analytics and tracking, alongside Civic Cookie Control for privacy compliance. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and accessibility features such as skip links and ARIA labels. Performance is moderate, with potential for improvement in load times and resource optimization. Hosting details are not explicit, but the presence of CDN and external scripts suggests a distributed infrastructure. Overall, the technical implementation supports a robust and user-friendly experience aligned with the organization's mission.
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 amnesty.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 amnesty.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.