Skip to main content

Security report for aurelia-stiftung.de

Aurelia Stiftung · Non-profit · Germany

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

71/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Aurelia Stiftung is a German non-profit foundation dedicated to the protection of bees and biodiversity. The organization advocates for sustainable agricultural practices, educates the public, and supports targeted projects to prevent ecosystem collapse. Their website reflects a professional and consistent brand image, targeting environmentally conscious individuals and stakeholders interested in biodiversity conservation. The foundation operates primarily through donations and public engagement. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with modern SEO and cookie management plugins, ensuring good performance and mobile responsiveness. The use of HTTPS and a cookie consent mechanism demonstrates a commitment to security and privacy compliance. However, some security headers are missing, and no explicit security or incident response policies are published. The security posture is solid with no detected vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data. Privacy policies are comprehensive and GDPR compliant, with clear cookie consent management. Contact is primarily via web forms, with no direct email or phone contacts publicly listed. WHOIS data is minimal but consistent with the foundation's profile and domain age. Overall, the website is trustworthy, professionally maintained, and compliant with relevant privacy regulations. Strategic improvements could include adding explicit security policies, incident response contacts, and enhancing security headers to further strengthen the security posture.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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 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 Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  3. 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

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

Keep watching aurelia-stiftung.de

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
77
Security headers
50
Email security
70
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
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

Aurelia Stiftung positions itself as a key advocate for bee protection and biodiversity in Germany, addressing the biodiversity crisis linked to pesticide-dependent agriculture. Their business model is non-profit, relying on donations and public support to fund projects and educational initiatives. The foundation targets environmentally aware individuals, policymakers, and stakeholders in agriculture and conservation. Their market presence is niche but important within the environmental non-profit sector. The website supports engagement through newsletters, social media, and donation calls to action. Partnerships or subsidiaries are not explicitly listed, indicating a focused organizational structure. The foundation's growth potential lies in expanding public awareness and influencing agricultural policy. Their digital presence is well-structured to support these goals, with clear messaging and calls to action. The use of third-party donation platforms and analytics tools indicates a modern approach to fundraising and audience engagement.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with HTTPS enforced and a robust cookie consent mechanism via Borlabs Cookie. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. However, the absence of explicit HTTP security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HSTS, and X-Frame-Options suggests room for improvement. No published security policy or incident response information was found, which could limit transparency and preparedness in case of security incidents. The use of third-party scripts like Google Analytics and Altruja is managed with user consent, aligning with GDPR requirements. Overall, the site is secure for its purpose but would benefit from enhanced security headers and published security policies to improve trust and compliance further.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTP security headers including Content Security Policy (CSP), HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection to harden the website against common attacks.
  2. Publish a clear security policy and incident response plan on the website to improve transparency and preparedness.
  3. Consider adding a security.txt file to facilitate responsible vulnerability disclosure.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and plugins to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve usability for all users and comply with accessibility standards.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Aurelia Stiftung
Description
Die Aurelia Stiftung ist die Fürsprecherin der Bienen. Unterstützen Sie unsere Projekte zum Schutz der Bienen.
Key services
Advocacy for bee and biodiversity protection, Educational initiatives, Project funding and support, Newsletter communication
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Yoast SEO plugin, jQuery, Borlabs Cookie, Google Analytics, Fancybox
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security-focused cookie management plugin

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Marketing tools
Altruja (donation platform)
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professionally designed non-profit foundation site focused on bee and biodiversity protection.
  2. Comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanism implemented.
  3. No terms of service or explicit security policy found.
  4. Contact available via forms but no direct email or phone numbers publicly listed.
  5. Use of modern WordPress CMS with SEO and cookie management plugins.
  6. Active social media presence on Instagram and Facebook.
  7. No signs of adult or questionable content.
  8. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.
  9. WHOIS data is minimal but domain age and content are consistent.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with Yoast SEO and Borlabs Cookie plugins, indicating a modern and SEO-optimized infrastructure. It uses jQuery and Fancybox for UI enhancements and integrates Google Analytics for traffic analysis. Hosting appears to be managed via DomainControl (GoDaddy) DNS services. Performance is moderate with responsive design for mobile devices. The site uses structured data (JSON-LD) for SEO and social media integration. No critical technical debt or outdated technologies were detected. Opportunities exist to improve security headers and accessibility compliance to reduce technical risks and enhance user experience.
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 aurelia-stiftung.de. 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 aurelia-stiftung.de.

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.