Skip to main content

Security report for cambridgecab.org.uk

Citizens Advice Cambridge & District · Non-profit · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

54/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Citizens Advice Cambridge & District is a well-established local charity providing free, confidential, and impartial advice services to residents of Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire. The organization operates a multi-channel advice platform including phone, email, and online help, supported by volunteers and funded by local councils and grants. Their website reflects a professional and trustworthy presence with clear branding, comprehensive content, and strong community focus. Technically, the site is built on WordPress using modern plugins and tools, with good mobile optimization and accessibility features. Security posture is solid with HTTPS enforced and no visible vulnerabilities, though some security headers are missing and no explicit incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are published. The WHOIS data for the domain is unavailable due to a Nominet UK naming rules error, which reduces domain registration transparency but does not detract from the legitimacy of the charity's web presence. Overall, the website scores well on content quality, technical implementation, and business credibility, with room for improvement in security policy transparency and domain registration clarity.

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

5 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

  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. 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';…

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

Keep watching cambridgecab.org.uk

This scan found 25 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
47
Security headers
15
Email security
85
DNS health
70
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
68
Average
54

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

The organization holds a strong position as a trusted local non-profit advice provider, leveraging partnerships with local government bodies and lottery funders. Their business model relies on volunteer engagement, donations, and public funding. The website supports recruitment, donations, and client engagement effectively. The presence of FCA authorization and Disability Confident Employer certification enhances credibility. The charity targets local residents needing advice on various issues, positioning itself as an essential community resource. The partnership ecosystem includes local councils and national lottery funders, indicating stable funding streams and community integration.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with HTTPS enforced and no exposed sensitive data. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options is a gap that could be exploited. No published security or incident response policies limit transparency and preparedness perception. Third-party scripts for chat and translation are used, which should be regularly audited for security and privacy compliance. The lack of a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file is a missed opportunity for responsible vulnerability management. Overall, the site is secure but could enhance its security culture and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and configure security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to harden the site against common web attacks.
  2. Publish a clear incident response and vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to improve transparency and encourage responsible reporting.
  3. Regularly audit third-party scripts and plugins for security and privacy compliance to mitigate supply chain risks.
  4. Engage with domain registrar or Nominet to resolve WHOIS data availability issues to improve domain registration transparency.
  5. Enhance cookie consent mechanisms to include explicit user consent and compliance with GDPR and ePrivacy Directive.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Citizens Advice Cambridge & District
Registration number
3191085
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Citizens Advice Cambridge & District
Description
Cambridge Citizens Advice is a local charity which provides free advice to meet the needs of our community. We’re here to help everyone who lives in Cambridge or South Cambridgeshire.
Key services
Freephone Adviceline, Email advice, Online help, Energy telephone appointments, Solicitors list, Volunteer recruitment, Donation and fundraising
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, WPBakery Page Builder, Yoast SEO, jQuery, Google Maps API, Google Language Translator, LiveChat, UserWay accessibility widget
Frameworks
WPBakery
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security and accessibility widgets

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Google Analytics (via gtag.js)
Marketing tools
LiveChat, ChatBot
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and clear navigation
  2. Strong branding and trust signals consistent with a local charity
  3. Multiple contact methods including phone, email, and forms
  4. Use of modern web technologies and accessibility tools
  5. No signs of adult or questionable content
  6. WHOIS data unavailable, which is a concern for domain transparency
  7. No explicit security policy or incident response information published
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a WordPress CMS platform with WPBakery Page Builder and Yoast SEO plugin, indicating a modern and flexible infrastructure. It uses jQuery and Google APIs for maps and translation, along with LiveChat and UserWay for user engagement and accessibility. The site is mobile responsive and optimized for accessibility, with good SEO metadata and structured data (JSON-LD). Performance is moderate, with potential improvements in caching and script optimization. The hosting provider is not explicitly identified. Overall, the technical stack supports a professional and user-friendly experience but could benefit from enhanced security configurations and performance tuning.
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 cambridgecab.org.uk. 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 cambridgecab.org.uk.

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.