Skip to main content

Security report for chelseafc.com

Chelsea FC · Hospitality · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

71/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Chelsea FC's official website serves as a comprehensive digital platform for fans and stakeholders, offering the latest news, match information, ticketing, hospitality, and merchandise. The site reflects the club's strong market position as a leading English football club with a global fanbase. Technically, the website employs modern web technologies including React, Google Tag Manager, and consent management tools, ensuring a responsive and engaging user experience across devices. Security posture is robust with HTTPS enforcement, security headers, and privacy compliance, although explicit security policies and incident response information are not publicly detailed. Overall, the site demonstrates a mature digital presence with strong branding and trust indicators, though WHOIS data absence slightly impacts domain trust assessment.

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 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 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

  4. DNS health

    DNS sends visitors and email to the right servers. Misconfigured records can cause outages or let someone redirect your traffic.

    • High

      Potential Subdomain Takeover

      Subdomain api.chelseafc.com points to unregistered service d1i7nrlfakj7f.cloudfront.net

      What to do: Remove or fix CNAME record to prevent subdomain takeover

      • WSTG-CONF-10
      • NIS2 21(2)(i)
      • IR 2024/2690 12.4: Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 12.4: Asset inventory
      • NIST CM-8: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-8: System Component Inventory

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

Keep watching chelseafc.com

This scan found 21 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
75
Security headers
40
Email security
80
DNS health
65
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

Chelsea FC operates in the sports and hospitality sectors, leveraging its brand to engage fans worldwide through digital content, ticket sales, and merchandise. The business model integrates media, e-commerce, and fan membership services, supported by partnerships with major brands like Nike and Bingx. The website's ecosystem includes ticketing and hospitality subdomains and partners with third-party ticketing services. Growth is supported by consistent content updates, fan engagement, and strategic sponsorships. The absence of detailed WHOIS data suggests privacy protection or recent domain changes, which is not uncommon for high-profile brands but warrants monitoring.

Security posture

The website exhibits a strong security posture with HTTPS, comprehensive security headers, and cookie consent mechanisms aligned with GDPR. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. However, the lack of a published security policy, incident response plan, or vulnerability disclosure program limits transparency. The site uses multiple third-party scripts which should be regularly audited to mitigate supply chain risks. Enhancing security communication and incident contact channels would improve overall security maturity and stakeholder trust.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response information on the website.
  2. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file.
  3. Enhance contact information for security incidents, including dedicated security email addresses.
  4. Regularly audit third-party scripts and dependencies for vulnerabilities.
  5. Consider providing more detailed business and compliance information to strengthen trust.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Chelsea FC
Description
Official Chelsea FC website providing latest news, videos, ticket information, player profiles, Stamford Bridge info, and online shop for merchandise.
Key services
News and media content, Ticket sales and hospitality packages, Online merchandise store, Club membership and fan engagement
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
React, Google Tag Manager, ConsentManager, JW Player, OneTrust, AdSense/Google Ads, Cloudinary (image hosting)
Frameworks
React
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of CSP
  • Cookie consent management
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google AdSense, DoubleClick
Tracking pixels
Google Analytics (via GTM), ConsentManager
Marketing tools
ConsentManager
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 media.
  2. Strong branding and consistent design aligned with Chelsea FC identity.
  3. Multiple official partner and sponsor logos present.
  4. Use of modern web technologies and consent management.
  5. No signs of phishing, malware, or suspicious content.
  6. WHOIS data unavailable or protected, which is unusual but not necessarily suspicious.
  7. Comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms.
  8. No explicit security policy or incident response info publicly available.
  9. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found.
  10. Contact info includes official emails and phone numbers related to hospitality and ticketing.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern React framework with integration of Google Tag Manager, JW Player for video content, and ConsentManager for privacy compliance. Images are served via Cloudinary, optimizing delivery. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and accessibility features. Performance is moderate, with room for improvement in loading times possibly due to multiple external scripts and ad networks. No CMS was explicitly detected, suggesting a custom or proprietary platform. Hosting details are not evident from the HTML content. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a high-quality user experience but should be monitored for third-party script impact on performance and security.
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 chelseafc.com. 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 chelseafc.com.

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.