Skip to main content

Security report for change.org

Change.org · Non-profit · N/a

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

76/100

Risk levelLow

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

Change.org is a globally recognized online petition platform that empowers over 200 million users to initiate and support social change campaigns. Positioned as the world's largest petition platform, it serves a broad audience of activists and concerned citizens seeking to influence decision makers. The platform's business model revolves around enabling social activism through technology, fostering community engagement and mobilization. Technically, the website employs modern web technologies including React for frontend development, integrates New Relic for performance and error monitoring, and uses PerimeterX for bot protection. The site demonstrates excellent mobile optimization, accessibility, and SEO practices, ensuring a fast and user-friendly experience across devices. From a security perspective, Change.org enforces HTTPS with strong SSL configurations and implements multiple security headers such as Content Security Policy and X-Frame-Options. The use of PerimeterX indicates proactive bot and abuse mitigation. However, explicit security policies and incident response contacts are not publicly evident, suggesting areas for improvement in transparency and compliance. Overall, the platform exhibits a high level of professionalism, trustworthiness, and technical maturity. The absence of WHOIS data due to privacy protection is typical for large public platforms and does not detract from its legitimacy. Strategic recommendations include publishing detailed security and incident response policies and enhancing transparency around data protection roles.

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

3 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 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
    • 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 change.org

This scan found 18 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
42
Security headers
75
Email security
87
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
76

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

Change.org holds a dominant market position as the largest petition platform worldwide, leveraging technology to facilitate social activism. Its competitive advantage lies in its extensive user base and brand recognition. The business model focuses on community-driven campaigns, with revenue likely derived from premium services and partnerships. Target customers include activists, NGOs, and socially conscious individuals. Growth indicators include a large global audience and continuous platform enhancements. The company maintains a strong partnership ecosystem evident from social media and external integrations. Operationally, the platform emphasizes scalability, security, and user engagement to sustain its market leadership.

Security posture

The security maturity of Change.org is robust, with enforced HTTPS, comprehensive security headers, and bot mitigation via PerimeterX. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analyzed content. Compliance with GDPR is indicated through accessible privacy policies and cookie consent mechanisms. However, the absence of a dedicated security policy page and incident response contact information represents a compliance gap. The platform's monitoring with New Relic suggests active performance and error tracking. Overall, the security culture appears mature but could benefit from enhanced transparency and formalized disclosure practices.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and compliance.
  2. Establish and publicize an incident response contact channel for security issues.
  3. Implement and disclose a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file.
  4. Enhance transparency regarding data protection officers and privacy roles.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts to mitigate supply chain risks.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Change.org
Description
Change.org is the world’s largest petition platform, using technology to empower more than 200 million users to create the change they want to see.
Key services
Petition creation, Campaign mobilization, Social activism platform
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
React, New Relic monitoring, Google Fonts, PX Cloud (PerimeterX) for bot protection
Frameworks
React
Platforms
Web
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Bot protection via PerimeterX
  • Content Security Policy
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
New Relic
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
New Relic
Marketing tools
New Relic, PerimeterX
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenge
  2. Strong branding and consistent design
  3. Comprehensive metadata and structured data for SEO
  4. Use of modern web technologies and monitoring tools
  5. No exposed sensitive information in HTML
  6. Privacy and cookie policies are present and accessible
  7. Contact information includes support email and contact form
  8. No explicit security policy or incident response page found
  9. WHOIS data is unavailable or privacy protected
  10. No suspicious or malicious domains detected
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern React framework, utilizing CDN-hosted assets and Google Fonts for typography. Performance monitoring is integrated via New Relic, and bot protection is managed through PerimeterX. The site demonstrates fast loading times, mobile responsiveness, and good accessibility features. No CMS was explicitly detected, suggesting a custom or proprietary platform. The technical infrastructure supports scalability and security, with room for improvement in hosting transparency and explicit documentation of technical controls.
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 change.org. 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 change.org.

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.