Skip to main content

Security report for archpaper.com

The Architect’s Newspaper · Media · United States

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Architect’s Newspaper is a well-established media publication focused on architecture and design in the United States, serving professionals and enthusiasts with authoritative news, analysis, and industry events. The website demonstrates a mature digital presence with a comprehensive content offering, including news articles, job listings, event information, and product libraries. It leverages a WordPress CMS with modern web technologies and integrates multiple third-party analytics and advertising services to support its business model. Security posture is generally good with HTTPS enforced and no obvious vulnerabilities detected, though some security headers could be improved. Privacy compliance is addressed with clear privacy and cookie policies and consent mechanisms. However, the WHOIS data for the domain is missing or inaccessible, which is unusual for a commercial site but does not appear to impact the legitimacy of the business. Overall, the site is professional, trustworthy, and well-positioned in its niche.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
65/ 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

7 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

    • 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

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

Keep watching archpaper.com

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
65
Security headers
20
Email security
75
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
65
Average
68

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 archpaper.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
36
Employees
0
Customers
36
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
17%

5 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 archpaper.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

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

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

The Architect’s Newspaper operates as a media company specializing in architecture and design content, targeting industry professionals and enthusiasts primarily in the US market. Its business model includes digital and print publications, event hosting, advertising, and job listings. The company maintains partnerships with related domains for awards, e-commerce, and continuing education, enhancing its ecosystem. The website's content quality and branding consistency support a strong market position. The absence of detailed WHOIS data is a minor concern but does not detract from the company's established presence. The site’s use of multiple marketing and analytics tools indicates a data-driven approach to audience engagement and monetization.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and integrates standard security practices, including the use of secure cookies and third-party security and analytics scripts. However, some common security headers like Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options are not explicitly detected and should be implemented to enhance protection against common web attacks. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were identified in the HTML content. The site lacks explicit security or incident response policies, which could be improved to demonstrate a stronger security culture and readiness. Overall, the security posture is solid but could benefit from additional hardening and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options HTTP headers.
  2. Publish a clear security policy and incident response plan accessible on the website.
  3. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
  4. Enhance accessibility features to meet compliance standards and improve user experience.
  5. Investigate and resolve the missing WHOIS data to improve domain registration transparency.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
The Architect’s Newspaper
Description
The most authoritative voice on architecture and design in the United States.
Key services
Architecture and design news, Industry events and conferences, Digital and print publications, Job listings, Advertising and sponsorship
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, jQuery, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, AdButler, Listrak, OptiMonk
Frameworks
Bootstrap (implied by navbar classes), Yoast SEO plugin
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of secure cookies and scripts

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Listrak
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
AdButler, Google Adsense, DoubleClick
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, Listrak
Marketing tools
OptiMonk, Listrak
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professional media publication focused on architecture and design.
  2. Content is rich, updated, and well-structured with multiple categories and sections.
  3. Strong social media presence and external partnerships.
  4. Use of multiple third-party advertising and analytics services.
  5. No signs of adult or inappropriate content.
  6. WHOIS data is missing or inaccessible, which is unusual but not necessarily malicious.
  7. HTTPS is enforced and security best practices mostly followed.
  8. No explicit security or incident response policies found on site.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with a modern tech stack including jQuery, Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, and AdButler for advertising. It uses Bootstrap-like responsive design for mobile optimization and includes SEO enhancements via Yoast SEO plugin. Performance is moderate with asynchronous loading of scripts and use of CDN-hosted libraries. The site shows good SEO practices with meta tags, Open Graph, and JSON-LD structured data. Accessibility is basic but could be improved. The technical infrastructure supports a professional media publication but could benefit from further optimization and security header enhancements.
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 archpaper.com. 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 archpaper.com.

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.