Skip to main content

Security report for bots.law

Free Law Project · Technology · United States

Low risk. 4 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

77/100

Risk levelLow

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

Bots.law is a specialized legal technology website operated by the Free Law Project, a US-based non-profit organization. The site offers automated court case alerts delivered through popular chat platforms such as Slack, Discord, Microsoft Teams, Mastodon, and Google Chat. It focuses on providing timely updates about significant court cases, leveraging the Big Cases bots and a community-powered document sharing model. The business model is donation-supported, emphasizing free access to legal information and tools. The website is relatively new, founded in 2023, and aligns well with the parent organization's mission to make legal data accessible and equitable. Technically, the website employs modern web standards including HTML5, CSS, JavaScript, and SVG graphics, hosted on AWS infrastructure. It uses minimal tracking via plausible.io analytics, ensuring a lightweight and privacy-conscious user experience. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, with good SEO practices evident from meta tags and structured content. However, it lacks explicit privacy and cookie policies, which is a gap in compliance and user transparency. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and uses domain transfer protection but does not enable DNSSEC or publish security headers. There is no visible security policy or incident response contact information, which could be improved to enhance trust and readiness. No vulnerabilities or suspicious patterns were detected, and the domain registration is consistent with the business timeline and geographic focus. Overall, Bots.law presents a professional, trustworthy, and mission-driven service with room for improvement in privacy compliance and security transparency. Strategic enhancements in these areas would strengthen user trust and regulatory alignment.

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

4 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

  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 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 bots.law

This scan found 17 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
80
Email security
70
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
77

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

Bots.law occupies a niche in the legal technology sector, targeting legal professionals, journalists, activists, and interested individuals who require real-time court case updates. Its competitive advantage lies in integration with multiple chat platforms and the backing of the reputable Free Law Project non-profit. The donation-supported model aligns with its mission-driven approach rather than commercial profit. The partnership ecosystem includes Free Law Project's other services such as CourtListener and RECAP, enhancing content richness and credibility. Growth indicators include active social media presence on emerging platforms like Bluesky and Mastodon. The business demonstrates a clear focus on accessibility and community-powered content sharing, positioning it well within the legal tech innovation space.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level. HTTPS is enforced, and domain transfer protections are in place, which are foundational security measures. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options reduces the overall security posture. No explicit security or incident response policies are published, which limits transparency and preparedness. The minimal use of tracking and absence of exposed sensitive data are positive indicators. Compliance gaps exist due to missing privacy and cookie policies, which are important for GDPR and other regulations. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a non-profit informational site but could benefit from enhancements to align with best practices and regulatory expectations.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies including GDPR compliance details and implement a cookie consent mechanism.
  3. Add standard security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  4. Provide explicit security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
  5. Consider expanding contact information with verified company emails or phone numbers to enhance user trust and support.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Free Law Project
Description
Bots.law provides court case alerts delivered via popular chat platforms such as Slack, Discord, Microsoft Teams, Mastodon, and Google Chat. It hosts the Big Cases bots that post updates about important court cases in the US. The service is powered by Free Law Project, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization focused on making legal information accessible and equitable.
Key services
Court case alerts via chat apps, Big Cases bots for major legal cases, Custom bots for user-selected cases, Access to free, searchable legal documents
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS (external stylesheet), JavaScript, SVG graphics, HTMX (indicated by htmx-config meta tag), AWS Route 53 DNS (based on nameservers)
Performance
fast
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced (implied by URL and plausible.io script)
  • Domain status clientTransferProhibited to prevent unauthorized transfers

Analytics and tracking

Services
plausible.io
Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
plausible.io
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the site.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly provided on the homepage or footer.
  4. Strong association with Free Law Project, a known non-profit organization.
  5. Use of modern web technologies and good mobile responsiveness.
  6. Minimal tracking limited to plausible.io analytics.
  7. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found.
  8. No explicit security or incident response contact information.
  9. Domain uses clientTransferProhibited status but lacks DNSSEC.
  10. Content is professionally presented and relevant to legal tech audience.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern web technologies including HTML5, CSS, JavaScript, and SVG for graphics, with HTMX indicated for dynamic content handling. Hosting is on AWS infrastructure, providing reliable and scalable performance. The site loads quickly and is mobile-optimized, ensuring good user experience across devices. SEO is well addressed through meta tags and Open Graph data. The use of plausible.io analytics reflects a privacy-conscious approach to user tracking. However, the lack of a CMS or framework mention suggests a custom or static site approach, which may limit scalability or content management efficiency. Technical debt appears low, but improvements in security headers and privacy compliance are recommended to reduce risk and enhance professionalism.
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 bots.law. 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 bots.law.

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.