Skip to main content

Security report for chipsalliance.org

CHIPS Alliance · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

51/100

Risk levelMedium

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

CHIPS Alliance is an open source hardware collaboration organization affiliated with The Linux Foundation, focusing on accelerating hardware development through community-driven projects. The website reflects a mature and professional presence with strong branding and a clear mission to support open source silicon and hardware designs. The alliance includes major industry players such as AMD, Google, Intel, and Microsoft, indicating a strong market position and credibility within the technology sector. Technically, the website is built using modern frameworks like Hugo and Bootstrap, with good mobile optimization and SEO practices. Security posture is solid with HTTPS enabled and use of a consent management platform, though explicit security policies and incident response contacts are not publicly detailed. Overall, the site is trustworthy, well-maintained, and serves its target audience effectively.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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

6 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.

    • Critical

      Unable to retrieve SSL certificate

      Could not establish secure connection to retrieve certificate information

      What to do: Check if the server is accessible and SSL/TLS is properly configured

  2. 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';…

  3. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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

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

Keep watching chipsalliance.org

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
0
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
51

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 CHIPS Alliance operates as a membership-based consortium promoting open source hardware development. Its business model leverages collaboration among industry leaders, academia, and individuals to reduce development costs and foster innovation. The alliance's ecosystem includes numerous platinum, gold, silver, auditor, and associate members, reflecting a broad and diverse partnership network. The organization benefits from its affiliation with The Linux Foundation, enhancing its legitimacy and reach. Revenue streams likely include membership fees and sponsorships. The alliance targets hardware developers, chip designers, and technology companies interested in open source silicon solutions. Growth indicators include active projects, workgroups, and recent news updates. Strategic partnerships with leading semiconductor and technology companies strengthen its competitive advantage.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a good security baseline with HTTPS enforced and integration of a reputable consent management platform (Osano) for cookie compliance. However, there is no publicly available dedicated security policy or incident response information, which could be improved to enhance transparency and readiness. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The absence of a security.txt or vulnerability disclosure policy limits the organization's ability to receive and manage security reports effectively. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a public-facing informational site but could benefit from enhanced security governance documentation and communication.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and compliance frameworks.
  2. Provide clear incident response contact information, including security@ or abuse@ email addresses.
  3. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Enhance HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  5. Regularly review and audit third-party scripts and dependencies to mitigate supply chain risks.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
CHIPS Alliance
Description
CHIPS (Common Hardware for Interfaces, Processors and Systems) Alliance harnesses the energy of open source collaboration to accelerate hardware development. The CHIPS Alliance develops high-quality, open source hardware designs relevant to silicon devices and FPGAs. By creating an open and collaborative environment, CHIPS Alliance shares resources to lower the cost of development. Companies and individuals can work together to develop open source CPUs, various peripherals, and complex IP blocks. CHIPS Alliance is open to all organizations who are interested in collaborating on open source hardware or software tools to accelerate the creation of more efficient and innovative chip designs.
Key services
Open source hardware design collaboration, Hosting projects, Workgroups and mailing lists, Events and community engagement
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Hugo 0.91.2, Bootstrap, jQuery, Phosphor Icons, Magnific Popup, Google Tag Manager
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of consent management platform (Osano)

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Osano CMP
Marketing tools
Osano Consent Management Platform
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 no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is rich, professional, and well-structured.
  3. Strong affiliation with The Linux Foundation and major tech companies.
  4. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on main pages; contact via form only.
  5. Use of modern web technologies and consent management platform.
  6. No explicit security policy or incident response information publicly available.
  7. WHOIS data is privacy protected or unavailable, common for such organizations.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the Hugo static site generator with Bootstrap for responsive design, jQuery for DOM manipulation, and Phosphor Icons for UI elements. It uses Google Tag Manager for analytics and Osano for cookie consent management, indicating a modern and privacy-conscious technical stack. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and accessibility features. The site is hosted securely with HTTPS and includes meta tags for SEO and social media sharing (Open Graph and Twitter Cards). There is no evidence of a CMS beyond Hugo, suggesting a static site approach that reduces attack surface. Technical risks are minimal, but the site could improve by adding security headers and formalizing security policies.
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 chipsalliance.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 chipsalliance.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.