Skip to main content

Security report for citizen-conservation.org

Citizen Conservation Foundation · Non-profit · Germany

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

56/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Citizen Conservation Foundation operates a German-based non-profit network dedicated to species conservation through coordinated breeding programs involving both institutional and private animal keepers. The organization leverages community engagement, scientific collaboration, and educational outreach to combat species extinction. The website reflects a well-established entity founded in 2017, with a clear mission and active social media presence. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern plugins and SEO tools, ensuring good performance and mobile optimization. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and cookie consent mechanisms, though DNSSEC is not enabled and some advanced security headers are missing. Privacy compliance is strong, with comprehensive policies and GDPR-aligned consent management. Overall, the website is professional, trustworthy, and serves its niche audience effectively.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
85/ 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

6 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 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';…
  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 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

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

Keep watching citizen-conservation.org

This scan found 24 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
62
Security headers
15
Email security
85
DNS health
70
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
85
Average
56

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention citizen-conservation.org, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for citizen-conservation.org right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

Monitor on Breach (opens in a new tab)

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 occupies a niche in the non-profit conservation sector, focusing on citizen science and coordinated breeding efforts. Its business model relies on community participation and partnerships with zoos and conservation groups. The website indicates strategic partnerships with recognized organizations such as VdZ Zoos, Frogs Friends, and DGHT, enhancing credibility and reach. The content and structure suggest a small but focused operation with growth potential through increased public engagement and project expansion. Revenue streams likely include donations and grants, supported by a clear call to action for donations. The multilingual support and active news/blog sections indicate ongoing engagement and transparency.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with mandatory HTTPS, cookie consent banners, and use of reCAPTCHA for forms. However, the absence of DNSSEC and some security headers like Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options represent areas for improvement. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The lack of a security policy or incident response contact limits transparency in handling security incidents. Overall, the site is secure for its purpose but could enhance defenses and disclosure practices.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to protect against DNS spoofing and improve overall DNS security.
  2. Implement a security.txt file to provide a clear vulnerability disclosure channel and improve trust.
  3. Add or verify security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to mitigate common web attacks.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and plugins to minimize risk from vulnerable components.
  5. Consider publishing a formal security policy and incident response contact information to enhance transparency and preparedness.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Citizen Conservation Foundation
Description
Citizen Conservation – ein Netzwerk institutioneller und privater Tierhaltenden, um koordinierte Erhaltungszuchten bedrohter Arten aufzubauen.
Key services
Coordinated conservation breeding, Community engagement, Information and education, Project collaboration
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.8.3, Yoast SEO Premium, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Contact Form 7, Site Kit by Google, Slider Revolution, WPML (multilingual plugin), Complianz GDPR Cookie Consent, TablePress, Uncode Theme
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent banner with opt-in/out
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of reCAPTCHA script for forms

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Jetpack Stats
Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Facebook SDK
Marketing tools
Site Kit by Google
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professionally maintained non-profit focused on species conservation.
  2. Content is in German with multilingual support (English available).
  3. Strong presence of privacy and cookie compliance mechanisms.
  4. Use of modern WordPress plugins and SEO tools.
  5. No signs of malicious or suspicious activity.
  6. Social media integration is present and consistent.
  7. No exposed sensitive data or security misconfigurations detected.
  8. DNSSEC is not enabled, which is a minor security gap.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress platform using a well-known theme (Uncode) and multiple plugins for SEO, multilingual support, analytics, and user interaction. The use of Google Tag Manager and Analytics indicates a data-driven approach to user engagement. Performance is moderate with optimizations like lazy loading images and responsive design. The site is mobile-friendly and accessible at a basic level. Technical debt appears low, but enabling DNSSEC and improving security headers would modernize the security posture. Hosting details are not explicit but DNS points to domaincontrol.com nameservers, commonly associated with GoDaddy registrar services.
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 citizen-conservation.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 citizen-conservation.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.