Skip to main content

Security report for citylitproject.org

CityLit Project · Non-profit · United States

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

67/100

Risk levelMedium

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

CityLit Project is a small non-profit organization dedicated to nurturing the culture of literature in Baltimore and Maryland. It organizes literary events, festivals, and community programs to engage diverse audiences and promote literary arts. The website reflects a well-established regional presence with a focus on community engagement and literary culture. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern plugins and frameworks, offering good performance and mobile optimization. Security posture is strong with HTTPS, security headers, and anti-spam measures, though formal security policies and incident response information are absent. Overall, the site presents a trustworthy and professional image with no signs of malicious activity or content safety concerns.

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

5 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 Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

  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 citylitproject.org

This scan found 25 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
30
Email security
70
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
67

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

CityLit Project operates in the non-profit literary arts sector, targeting readers, writers, and cultural communities in Maryland. Its business model relies on donations, events, and publishing activities. The organization maintains a consistent brand and active social media presence, enhancing community reach and engagement. The website supports fundraising and event promotion, indicating a sustainable operational approach. While WHOIS data is unavailable, the organization's transparency and digital maturity suggest legitimacy and stable market positioning within its niche.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, multiple security headers, and anti-spam protections. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. However, the absence of a published security policy, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms indicates room for improvement in transparency and preparedness. The site uses secure forms with validation and integrates trusted analytics tools responsibly. Overall, the security risk is low but could be enhanced by formalizing policies and response procedures.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and user data handling.
  2. Add incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
  3. Regularly review and update third-party plugins to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  4. Enhance website accessibility features to comply with best practices and legal requirements.
  5. Consider implementing a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
CityLit Project
Description
CityLit Project nurtures the culture of literature in Baltimore and throughout Maryland. It creates enthusiasm for the literary arts, connects a community of avid readers and writers, and designs opportunities for diverse audiences to embrace the literary arts.
Key services
Literary events and festivals, Publishing through CityLit Press, Community engagement and education, Youth programs
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.8.1, PHP, Google Analytics, CleanTalk Anti-Spam, KingComposer, Slider Revolution, Bootstrap 3.3.7, jQuery 3.7.1
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Anti-spam plugin (CleanTalk)
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure forms with validation

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Marketing tools
MonsterInsights (Google Analytics plugin), CleanTalk Anti-Spam
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professionally maintained non-profit literary organization site.
  2. Content is rich, relevant, and well-structured.
  3. No signs of malicious or suspicious activity.
  4. WHOIS data unavailable, likely due to privacy protection.
  5. Good use of modern web technologies and security best practices.
  6. No detected security policy or incident response page.
  7. Social media presence is active and consistent.
  8. Donation and event management features are integrated.
  9. No adult or questionable content detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is powered by WordPress 6.8.1 with a modern tech stack including Bootstrap, jQuery, and Slider Revolution. It uses CleanTalk for anti-spam and MonsterInsights for analytics. The site is mobile optimized and uses responsive design. Performance is moderate, with room for optimization in loading speed. SEO is well addressed with proper meta tags and structured data. Accessibility is basic but could be improved. Hosting provider details are not evident from the HTML content. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports the organization's goals effectively with standard web technologies.
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 citylitproject.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 citylitproject.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.