Skip to main content

Security report for cookiepedia.co.uk

OneTrust · Technology · United Kingdom

Low risk. 2 critical or high findings in Email security and SSL/TLS.

Security score

79/100

Risk levelLow

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

Cookiepedia is a well-established UK-based website providing the largest database of pre-categorized cookies, supported by OneTrust, a leading privacy management software company. The site offers detailed information about cookies, their types, and privacy implications, targeting website owners, privacy professionals, and general users interested in online privacy compliance. The business model revolves around providing transparency and compliance tools, including a website scanning service integrated with CookiePro by OneTrust. Technically, the site uses modern web technologies such as jQuery, Bootstrap, Chart.js, and OneTrust's cookie consent SDK, ensuring a responsive and user-friendly experience. Security posture is solid with HTTPS enforced and a comprehensive cookie consent mechanism, though there is room for improvement in publishing explicit security policies and incident response information. Overall, the domain registration and WHOIS data support the legitimacy and trustworthiness of the site, with no signs of suspicious activity or content blocking.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of cookiepedia.co.uk. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
100/ 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

2 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.

    • High

      No SPF record found

      SPF helps prevent email spoofing

      What to do: Add SPF record: "v=spf1 include:_spf.yourmailprovider.com ~all"

  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 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 cookiepedia.co.uk

This scan found 16 issues across 5 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
75
Security headers
80
Email security
50
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
100
Average
79

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 cookiepedia.co.uk, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for cookiepedia.co.uk 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

Cookiepedia holds a strong market position as the largest cookie database, leveraging OneTrust's technology and data. Its competitive advantage lies in comprehensive cookie categorization and integration with compliance tools. The target customers include website owners needing cookie compliance, privacy-conscious users, and regulatory professionals. Revenue streams likely include subscription or service fees for scanning and compliance tools. The partnership ecosystem prominently features OneTrust and CookiePro, enhancing service offerings. Strategic observations include the importance of maintaining data accuracy, expanding scanning capabilities, and enhancing security transparency to strengthen market trust.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with HTTPS enabled and a robust cookie consent framework that respects user privacy choices. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. However, the absence of a dedicated security policy page and incident response contacts indicates gaps in transparency and readiness. The use of third-party scripts like OneTrust's SDK is a best practice but requires ongoing monitoring for vulnerabilities. Compliance with GDPR is evident through consent mechanisms and privacy policy details. Overall, the security culture appears proactive but could benefit from formalized policies and incident response disclosures.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and controls.
  2. Provide clear incident response contact channels such as security@ or abuse@ emails.
  3. Implement and report security headers like Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party libraries and scripts to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance accessibility features and mobile optimization for broader user inclusivity.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
OneTrust
Description
Cookiepedia is all about cookies and online tracking. It categorizes cookies and hosts domains to enable people to make informed online privacy choices.
Key services
Cookie database, Cookie categorization, Website scanning for cookies and privacy risks, Cookie consent management integration
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery 3.5.1, Bootstrap, Chart.js, OneTrust Cookie Consent SDK
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent banner with opt-in/out
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
OneTrust Cookie Consent
Marketing tools
OneTrust Cookie Consent, Google site verification
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Notes

The website is built on a solid technical foundation using Bootstrap for responsive design, jQuery for interactivity, and Chart.js for data visualization. Integration with OneTrust's cookie consent and scanning services adds compliance functionality. Hosting via Namecheap is standard for medium-sized businesses. Performance is moderate with room for optimization, especially in script loading and caching. SEO is supported by appropriate meta tags and Google site verification. Technical debt appears low, but modernization opportunities include adopting newer JavaScript frameworks and improving accessibility compliance. Overall, the infrastructure supports the business goals effectively with manageable technical risks.
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. 79/100Low24 findingsView report
  2. 79/100Low22 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with cookiepedia.co.uk. 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 cookiepedia.co.uk.

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.