Skip to main content

Security report for ansi.org

American National Standards Institute · Government · United States

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

71/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) is a prominent non-profit organization that facilitates and coordinates the U.S. voluntary standards and conformity assessment system. It serves a broad audience including standards developers, government entities, industry participants, consumers, and educational institutions. ANSI plays a critical role in accrediting standards developers, coordinating standards activities, and representing the U.S. in international standards organizations such as ISO and IEC. The website reflects a mature digital presence with comprehensive content, structured data, and a clear focus on education, outreach, and standards development support. Technically, the website employs modern web technologies including JavaScript frameworks, Coveo search integration, Google Tag Manager, and Cookiebot for consent management. The site is built on the Sitecore CMS platform and uses Bootstrap for responsive design. Performance and accessibility are good, with mobile optimization and SEO best practices implemented. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforced and no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data, although explicit security headers and incident response information could be improved. Overall, the website demonstrates a high level of professionalism, trustworthiness, and compliance with privacy regulations including GDPR. The lack of WHOIS data limits domain registration trust verification but does not detract significantly from the organization's credibility given its established reputation and affiliations. The site effectively supports ANSI's mission and provides valuable resources and engagement opportunities for its diverse stakeholders.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 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. 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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

    • 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. 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 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 ansi.org

This scan found 20 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
35
Email security
60
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
Average
71

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

ANSI holds a leading position in the U.S. standards ecosystem, acting as the primary coordinator and accreditor of standards development activities. Its business model is centered on non-profit facilitation, education, and international representation. Revenue streams likely include membership dues, training and event fees, and sales of standards and subscriptions. The organization targets a wide range of customers including standards developers, government agencies, industry sectors, consumers, and academia. Partnerships with affiliates such as ANAB and Workcred enhance its service offerings. The website content and structure indicate a well-established organization with a strong focus on governance, outreach, and capacity building in standards and conformity assessment.

Security posture

ANSI's website security posture is robust, featuring HTTPS encryption, consent-based tracking controls, and no apparent exposure of sensitive information. The use of Google Tag Manager and Cookiebot indicates a mature approach to privacy and analytics management. However, the absence of a publicly visible security policy, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure program represents an area for improvement. Security headers are not explicitly detected in the provided data, suggesting potential enhancements in HTTP header configurations. Overall, the site aligns well with best practices for organizational websites in the standards and governance domain, with no critical vulnerabilities identified.

Recommendations

  1. Publish explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Establish and publicly disclose a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  3. Provide clear incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness for security events.
  4. Enhance data retention and privacy policy disclosures to align with evolving regulatory requirements and user expectations.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and libraries to ensure no vulnerabilities or deprecated components are present.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
American National Standards Institute
Description
The American National Standards Institute - ANSI - facilitates and coordinates the U.S. voluntary standards and conformity assessment system.
Key services
Standards accreditation, Standards coordination, Education and training, International representation (ISO, IEC), Consumer and government outreach, Events and workshops
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Coveo search platform, Google Tag Manager, Cookiebot, Modernizr
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of Google Tag Manager with consent
  • No vulnerable libraries detected

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager)
Marketing tools
Cookiebot
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 structured data and SEO best practices
  3. Comprehensive coverage of standards-related topics and resources
  4. Use of modern web technologies and consent-based tracking
  5. No signs of malicious or suspicious content
  6. WHOIS data is unavailable or blocked, limiting domain trust verification
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the Sitecore CMS platform, leveraging Bootstrap for responsive design and Coveo for advanced search capabilities. It integrates Google Tag Manager and Cookiebot for analytics and consent management, reflecting a modern and privacy-conscious technology stack. JavaScript libraries such as Modernizr are used for feature detection. The site demonstrates good mobile optimization and accessibility features. Performance is moderate, with asynchronous loading of scripts and optimized image usage. Technical debt appears minimal, though opportunities exist to enhance security headers and streamline third-party dependencies for improved performance and security.
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 ansi.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 ansi.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.