Skip to main content

Security report for cookiedatabase.org

Cookiedatabase.org · Technology · N/a

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

80/100

Risk levelLow

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

Cookiedatabase.org is a specialized transparency project launched in 2019 to provide detailed information about cookies, tracking technologies, and their privacy implications. Supported by Complianz and SIDN Fund, it offers a searchable database and Data Passports describing services and organizations involved in online tracking. The website is built on WordPress with Elementor and integrates a GDPR-compliant cookie consent mechanism. Technically, it supports modern TLS protocols and uses Matomo for analytics, but lacks some advanced security configurations such as HSTS and DNSSEC. No direct company contact emails or phone numbers are published, with contact likely via web forms. Overall, the site demonstrates good content quality, privacy compliance, and moderate technical maturity, positioning it as a trusted resource in the privacy and tracking transparency niche.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of cookiedatabase.org. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
55/ 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

3 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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 Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  2. 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 384-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 cookiedatabase.org

This scan found 15 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
67
Security headers
90
Email security
80
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
55
Average
80

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 project targets privacy-conscious users, website owners, and researchers interested in understanding online tracking. Its business model is non-commercial, relying on sponsorships and partnerships for funding. The site leverages popular WordPress plugins and technologies to maintain and present its data. Key partnerships with Complianz and SIDN Fund enhance credibility and operational support. The presence of multilingual support and a large user contribution base indicates active community engagement. The project occupies a niche market position focused on transparency and education rather than commercial services.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS with TLS 1.3 and 1.2, avoiding known SSL vulnerabilities. However, it lacks HSTS enforcement, OCSP stapling, and DNSSEC, which are recommended for enhanced security. The SPF DNS record is configured, but CAA records appear misconfigured or undefined. No explicit security or incident response policies are published on the site. The use of a reputable cookie consent plugin and Matomo analytics with consent enforcement indicates good privacy practices. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be improved with additional DNS and HTTP security headers.

Recommendations

  1. Enable HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) with includeSubDomains and preload to enforce HTTPS.
  2. Correctly configure CAA DNS records to specify authorized certificate authorities.
  3. Implement DNSSEC to protect against DNS spoofing and improve domain security.
  4. Enable OCSP stapling on the SSL certificate to improve revocation checking performance.
  5. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information to enhance transparency.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress using Elementor page builder and integrates the Complianz GDPR plugin for cookie consent management. It uses jQuery and Matomo analytics for tracking with user consent. The hosting infrastructure includes Cloudflare DNS and nameservers, providing some level of protection and performance optimization. The site has moderate load times (~5.2 seconds) with 72 resources and a page size of ~240 KB, indicating room for performance optimization. SEO is supported by proper meta tags, Open Graph, and JSON-LD structured data. Accessibility is basic but present. The site is mobile optimized and uses modern TLS protocols, but lacks some advanced security configurations.
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. 75/100 −9Medium20 findingsView report
  2. 84/100Low25 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with cookiedatabase.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 cookiedatabase.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.