Skip to main content

Security report for commonscaretakers.com

Commons Caretakers BV · Technology · N/a

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

Security score

76/100

Risk levelLow

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

Commons Caretakers BV operates as an intermediary service provider supporting the creation and maintenance of digital commons, focusing on free and open source software and hardware projects. It serves grantees of the NGI Zero programs and the broader NGI ecosystem, collaborating closely with partners such as the NLnet foundation and The Commons Conservancy. The website presents a professional and clear description of its mission and services, targeting creators and maintainers of digital commons and FOSS communities. Technically, the website is built with basic HTML and CSS, featuring responsive design elements for mobile optimization. However, no advanced frameworks, CMS, or analytics tools are detected. The site lacks security headers and HTTPS information in the provided data, indicating potential gaps in security implementation. No forms or tracking scripts are present, suggesting minimal data collection. From a security perspective, the absence of HTTPS and security headers reduces the security posture score. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies are published, and no contact or incident response information is available, which impacts compliance and trust. The WHOIS data is missing or inaccessible, which is inconsistent with the active website presence and lowers domain legitimacy confidence. Overall, Commons Caretakers presents a focused and professional digital presence with clear business objectives but requires improvements in security, privacy compliance, and transparency to enhance trust and reduce risk.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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 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 Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

    • 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

    • 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

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

Keep watching commonscaretakers.com

This scan found 17 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
65
Email security
85
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
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

Commons Caretakers occupies a niche position as a specialized intermediary supporting digital commons and open source projects. Its business model revolves around providing services and mentoring to grantees of NGI programs, leveraging partnerships with established organizations like NLnet foundation. The company targets a specialized audience of FOSS developers and digital commons maintainers, which limits its market size but strengthens its domain expertise. The lack of publicly available contact information and policies may hinder broader market trust and growth potential. The partnership ecosystem is a key asset, providing credibility and resource access. Revenue streams likely derive from grants and service contracts within the open source ecosystem.

Security posture

The current security posture is limited due to missing HTTPS implementation and absence of security headers, which are critical for protecting user data and preventing common web attacks. No privacy or cookie policies are published, indicating potential non-compliance with GDPR and other data protection regulations. The lack of incident response and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms further reduces readiness for security events. While no explicit vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data are detected, the site would benefit from adopting standard security best practices, including SSL/TLS, security headers, and published policies to improve compliance and user trust.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate to secure all website traffic.
  2. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to enhance GDPR compliance and user trust.
  3. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Provide clear contact information including security incident response contacts and vulnerability disclosure channels.
  5. Consider implementing a security.txt file and vulnerability disclosure policy to improve transparency and security culture.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Commons Caretakers BV
Description
Commons Caretakers delivers intermediary services related to the creation and maintenance of digital commons efforts. It supports creators and maintainers of digital commons, providing services and support to grantees of NGI Zero programs and the wider NGI ecosystem. It is a subsidiary of NLnet foundation and collaborates with partners like The Commons Conservancy.
Key services
Intermediary services for digital commons creation and maintenance, Support and mentoring for FOSS projects, Services to NGI Zero and NGI ecosystem grantees
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
30/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible with full content and no blocking detected.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the site.
  3. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses are provided on the homepage.
  4. No forms or input fields detected in the HTML content.
  5. No scripts or external JavaScript libraries detected in the provided HTML.
  6. Site uses basic HTML and CSS with responsive design elements.
  7. No analytics or tracking scripts detected.
  8. No security headers or HTTPS information available from provided data.
  9. WHOIS data is missing or domain appears unregistered, which is inconsistent with active site presence.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a simple, clean HTML5 and CSS3 structure without reliance on external JavaScript libraries or CMS platforms, which reduces attack surface but limits advanced functionality. The site is mobile responsive and well-structured for navigation. However, the lack of HTTPS and security headers is a significant technical deficiency. No analytics or tracking scripts are present, indicating minimal data collection but also limited insight into user behavior. Hosting provider and infrastructure details are not available, which limits assessment of backend security and performance. Overall, the technical implementation is basic but functional, with room for modernization and security enhancements.
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 commonscaretakers.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 commonscaretakers.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.