Skip to main content

Security report for consentframework.com

Sirdata · Technology · France

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

63/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Consent Framework website operated by Sirdata provides an open initiative platform focused on balancing user privacy with the funding of free content through respectful advertising within the EU and UK. The site clearly targets users and websites participating in this network, emphasizing GDPR compliance and user consent management. Technically, the site uses modern frontend technologies including Bootstrap, Google Fonts, and Plausible Analytics for minimal tracking. The design is responsive and professional, supporting a good user experience. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS implied but lacks explicit security headers and detailed security policies. Privacy compliance is partial, with a cookie consent mechanism present but no explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages found. Business credibility is supported by consistent branding and clear association with Sirdata, though contact information is not explicitly provided. Overall, the site is functional and trustworthy but would benefit from enhanced transparency and security documentation.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of consentframework.com. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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

8 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

  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 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 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

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

Keep watching consentframework.com

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
72
Security headers
55
Email security
40
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
63

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

Sirdata positions itself as a technology company specializing in consent management frameworks to help websites comply with privacy regulations while enabling advertising funding. The business model revolves around providing a network where user consent is managed centrally and applied across participating websites. The target market is primarily European Union and United Kingdom internet users and website operators. The company appears medium-sized with a focus on technology and privacy sectors. The website content and external links reinforce Sirdata's role as the operator of this framework. No direct revenue or partnership details are disclosed on the site. The company maintains a professional online presence with consistent branding and a clear value proposition around privacy and advertising balance.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security posture with HTTPS usage implied by all external scripts loaded over HTTPS. However, no explicit security headers were detected in the provided data, and no detailed security or incident response policies are published on the site. There is no evidence of vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files. The cookie consent mechanism is implemented, supporting GDPR compliance. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were identified in the HTML content. The absence of contact information for security incidents or data protection officers limits the site's transparency in security matters. Overall, the security posture is adequate for the site's purpose but could be improved with enhanced security headers, documented policies, and incident response contacts.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service pages to improve transparency and compliance.
  2. Add explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance security posture.
  3. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information, including security@ or abuse@ email addresses.
  4. Introduce a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
  5. Enhance accessibility features and SEO optimization to improve user experience and search engine visibility.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Sirdata
Description
Sirdata manages the Consent Framework, an open initiative focused on balancing user privacy with funding free content through user-respectful advertising within the European Union and the United Kingdom.
Key services
Consent management, User privacy compliance, Advertising cookie consent moderation
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Bootstrap 4.6.2, Google Fonts (Nunito, Montserrat), Material Icons, Plausible Analytics
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS usage (implied by script sources using https)

Analytics and tracking

Services
Plausible Analytics
Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Plausible Analytics
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible and not blocked by WAF or security challenges
  2. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages found
  3. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented and functional
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly provided on the main page
  5. Website uses modern frontend technologies and responsive design
  6. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found
  7. Legal notice link is present but no detailed security or privacy policies
  8. External links mostly related to consent framework and Sirdata domains
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern frontend stack including Bootstrap 4.6.2 for responsive design, Google Fonts (Nunito and Montserrat) for typography, and Material Icons for UI elements. It loads JavaScript modules asynchronously from consentframework.com and plausible.io for analytics. The site is mobile optimized with responsive CSS and media queries. Performance is moderate given the use of external scripts and fonts but no explicit performance metrics are available. No CMS or hosting provider information is detected from the HTML content. The site lacks explicit meta tags for Open Graph or JSON-LD structured data. Technical debt appears low, but improvements in SEO and accessibility are recommended. No critical technical vulnerabilities were identified in the HTML content.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 68/100 +4Medium30 findingsView report
  2. 64/100Medium31 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with consentframework.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 consentframework.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.