Skip to main content

Security report for arcisolidarietaonlus.com

Non-profit · Italy

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

65/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website arcisolidarietaonlus.com is a private, restricted-access site hosted on WordPress.com and registered through Automattic Inc. The site is intended for authorized users only, with no public content available for analysis. The domain is registered since 2017, consistent with a small non-profit organization likely based in Italy. The technical infrastructure relies on WordPress CMS and standard WordPress.com hosting services. Security posture is basic with HTTPS enabled but lacking security headers and DNSSEC. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies are publicly available, and no contact information is provided. Overall, the site is inaccessible for public users, limiting the ability to assess business operations or compliance fully.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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 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 Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

    • 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 arcisolidarietaonlus.com

This scan found 22 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
35
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
65

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 arcisolidarietaonlus.com, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for arcisolidarietaonlus.com right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

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

Due to the restricted access, no detailed business information, market positioning, or service offerings can be determined. The domain age and hosting provider suggest a small non-profit entity. No public contact details or certifications are visible. The website appears to serve a closed community or membership base, which may explain the lack of public-facing content and policies.

Security posture

The website uses HTTPS and has domain status clientTransferProhibited, which are positive security indicators. However, the absence of DNSSEC, security headers, and public security policies reduces the overall security maturity. The lack of incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is a compliance gap. The site does not expose sensitive data publicly but also does not provide transparency on data protection practices.

Recommendations

  1. Publish privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and improve transparency.
  2. Implement DNSSEC to enhance DNS security.
  3. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and HSTS.
  4. Provide public contact information and incident response details for security and compliance.
  5. Improve accessibility and SEO metadata to enhance user experience and discoverability.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

None detected. Website content is blocked behind a login page requiring authorized user access. No WAF or security challenge detected. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Description
No business description available due to restricted access
Content quality
poor

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Dashicons, Jetpack, Gravatar
Platforms
wordpress.com
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
40/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Domain status clientTransferProhibited

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website content is fully blocked behind a login page requiring authorized user access.
  2. No public content available to analyze business or security policies.
  3. Website uses WordPress.com hosting and standard WordPress assets.
  4. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  5. No contact information or forms are publicly accessible.
  6. No security headers detected in the HTML content.
  7. Domain registration is consistent and legitimate.
  8. No analytics or advertising scripts detected.
  9. Content safety rating is safe due to lack of content and no adult material.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS hosted by Automattic Inc., using standard WordPress assets and plugins such as Jetpack and Gravatar. The site is mobile responsive at a basic level but lacks advanced SEO and accessibility features. Performance is moderate given the WordPress.com hosting environment. The site is locked behind a login page, limiting public content exposure and analysis. No analytics or advertising scripts are detected, indicating minimal tracking or marketing tools in use.
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 arcisolidarietaonlus.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 arcisolidarietaonlus.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.