Skip to main content

Security report for api.org

American Petroleum Institute · Energy · United States

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

71/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The American Petroleum Institute (API) website serves as the digital presence for the national trade association representing the U.S. oil and natural gas industry. The site provides comprehensive information about the industry, membership services, energy economics, and standards development. It targets industry professionals, policymakers, and consumers interested in energy topics. The business model is centered on advocacy, standards, and member services, positioning API as a key industry representative. Technically, the website employs modern frameworks such as Bootstrap, integrates multiple analytics and advertising tools, and uses Google reCAPTCHA for form security. The site is mobile optimized and demonstrates good SEO practices, though accessibility features could be improved. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and reCAPTCHA, but lacks some security headers and explicit incident response or vulnerability disclosure information. Privacy and cookie policies are not clearly found in the provided content, indicating room for compliance improvement. Overall, the site is professional, trustworthy, and content-rich, but WHOIS data is unavailable from the provided raw output, limiting domain trust verification.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
73/ 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

4 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 Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1
    • 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. 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

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

Keep watching api.org

This scan found 21 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
90
Security headers
20
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
73
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

API holds a strong market position as the sole national trade association for the U.S. oil and natural gas industry, with over 600 corporate members spanning the entire industry spectrum. Its competitive advantage lies in its authoritative standards, advocacy, and comprehensive industry data. Revenue streams likely include membership fees, training and certification programs, and publication sales. The target customer segments include industry companies, regulators, and the public seeking energy information. The partnership ecosystem includes related domains such as events.api.org and apiwebstore.org, supporting events and commerce. Strategic observations highlight API's role as an industry standard-bearer and information hub, with a well-maintained digital presence supporting its mission.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, use of Google reCAPTCHA to protect forms, and controlled script loading via Google Tag Manager. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options reduces defense-in-depth. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms were found, which could hinder coordinated vulnerability reporting. Incident response contact information is not publicly visible, limiting transparency. The site uses multiple third-party tracking and advertising services, which may raise privacy considerations. Overall, the security posture is good but could be enhanced by implementing recommended headers, publishing security policies, and improving privacy disclosures.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options.
  2. Publish a security.txt file to facilitate vulnerability disclosure and improve security transparency.
  3. Provide clear incident response contact information on the website.
  4. Ensure privacy and cookie policies are clearly accessible, comprehensive, and GDPR compliant.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to meet recognized standards and improve user experience for all visitors.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
American Petroleum Institute
Description
The American Petroleum Institute (API) is the only national trade association that represents all aspects of America’s oil and natural gas industry. Our more than 600 corporate members, from the largest major oil company to the smallest of independents, come from all segments of the industry.
Key services
Industry standards development, Membership services, Energy economics and statistics, Training and certification, Advocacy and policy engagement
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap CSS, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Facebook SDK, Font Awesome, reCAPTCHA, Coveo Search UI, HubSpot Forms, ClickCease
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA for forms
  • Google Tag Manager for controlled script loading

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Bing Ads, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Twitter Universal Website Tag
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
Bing Ads, StackAdapt
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Twitter Universal Website Tag
Marketing tools
Cookiebot Consent Management
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content about the American Petroleum Institute.
  2. No WHOIS data could be extracted from the raw output provided.
  3. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service pages were detected in the provided HTML snippet.
  4. Multiple external tracking and advertising services are used, with Cookiebot present but no explicit cookie policy page found.
  5. No direct contact emails or phone numbers were found in the provided content.
  6. Site uses modern web technologies and is mobile optimized.
  7. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found.
  8. No incident response or security policy information found.
  9. Content is safe and appropriate for general audiences.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern technology stack including Bootstrap for responsive design, Font Awesome for icons, and integrates multiple analytics and advertising platforms such as Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, and Twitter Universal Website Tag. It employs Google Tag Manager for script management and Google reCAPTCHA for bot protection. The site leverages Coveo for search functionality and HubSpot for forms. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization. No CMS was explicitly detected. Hosting provider details are not available from the provided data. Technical risks include reliance on multiple third-party scripts which may impact privacy and performance. There is an opportunity to improve technical SEO and accessibility compliance.
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 api.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 api.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.