Skip to main content

Security report for camphillschool.org.uk

Camphill School Aberdeen · Education · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

69/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Camphill School Aberdeen is a charitable organization dedicated to supporting young people with learning disabilities and complex additional support needs in north east Scotland. With a history spanning approximately 80 years, the organization provides specialized education, residential care, workshops, therapies, and community transport services. The website reflects a well-established non-profit entity with a clear mission and sector-leading care reputation in its niche. Technically, the website is built on the Webflow platform, leveraging modern web technologies such as Google Tag Manager, Google Fonts, and reCAPTCHA for security and analytics. The site is mobile-optimized and presents a professional design with consistent branding. Security posture is generally good with HTTPS enforced and use of reCAPTCHA; however, explicit security headers and published security policies are lacking. Privacy compliance is partial, with a cookie consent banner present but no visible privacy policy or terms of service in the provided content. The WHOIS lookup failed due to domain naming issues, raising concerns about domain legitimacy or configuration, though the website content itself appears credible. Overall, the site demonstrates moderate digital maturity with room for improvement in privacy and security transparency.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 100 · Low
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. 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
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching camphillschool.org.uk

This scan found 23 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. See sample alerts.

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
57
Security headers
30
Email security
85
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
69

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 operates in the education and non-profit sectors, targeting a specialized audience of young people with disabilities and their supporters. Its business model is based on charitable funding and community support, including donations and fundraising activities. The website's market position is strong within its local region, emphasizing an 80-year legacy and sector leadership. The presence of donation links and corporate partnership options indicates diversified revenue streams. The partnership ecosystem includes local giving platforms. Growth indicators include active volunteer recruitment and community engagement. Strategic observations suggest a focus on maintaining trust and expanding support through clear communication and digital presence.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS with a good SSL configuration and integrates Google reCAPTCHA to protect forms from abuse. However, it lacks explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options, which are recommended to enhance security against common web attacks. No published security policy, incident response plan, or vulnerability disclosure mechanism was found, which limits transparency and preparedness. The cookie consent mechanism indicates some GDPR awareness, but the absence of a privacy policy and terms of service reduces compliance confidence. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analyzed content. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be strengthened by implementing recommended headers and publishing security documentation.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, and Referrer-Policy.
  2. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service accessible from the website footer or main navigation.
  3. Establish and publish a security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
  4. Add a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  5. Verify and correct domain registration details to resolve WHOIS lookup failures and improve domain legitimacy perception.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Camphill School Aberdeen
Description
A charity helping young people with learning disabilities and complex additional support needs in north east Scotland. The Camphill movement began in Aberdeen 80 years ago and is now a global community.
Key services
Day & Residential education, Workshops, Therapies, Community Transport, Residential Home, Support and fundraising activities
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Webflow CMS, Google Fonts (Oswald), Google Tag Manager, Google reCAPTCHA, Slick Carousel, Lottie animations
Platforms
Webflow
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA on forms
  • Cookie consent banner with opt-in/out

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager)
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 challenge
  2. No WHOIS data available due to domain naming error
  3. Cookie consent banner present with opt-in/out options
  4. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service found in provided content
  5. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in HTML content
  6. Use of modern web technologies and CMS (Webflow)
  7. Good branding and consistent messaging
  8. No explicit security policy or incident response info published
  9. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found
  10. Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager used for tracking
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the Webflow CMS platform, utilizing modern front-end technologies such as Google Fonts (Oswald), Slick Carousel for UI components, and Lottie animations for enhanced visual engagement. Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics are integrated for tracking and marketing insights. The site is mobile responsive with good navigation clarity and professional design. Performance is moderate, with CDN usage for static assets. Accessibility features are basic and could be improved. No major technical debt or deprecated libraries were detected. Opportunities exist to enhance SEO and accessibility compliance further. Hosting provider details were not explicitly identified from the content.
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 camphillschool.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 camphillschool.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.