Skip to main content

Security report for copolad.eu

Copolad · Government · Spain

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and Security headers.

Security score

53/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Copolad is a government and non-profit cooperation program focused on drug policy collaboration between Latin America, the Caribbean, and the European Union. The website serves as an information portal offering news, publications, training, and event details to stakeholders involved in drug policy. The business model is based on international cooperation funded by the EU and partner organizations, positioning Copolad as a reputable program in its sector. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with multiple plugins and frameworks including WP Rocket, WPML for multilingual support, and various marketing and analytics tools such as Google Analytics and Mailchimp. The site is hosted by Arsys Internet S.L.U. but suffers from slow load times and lacks a valid SSL certificate, which impacts security and user trust. From a security perspective, the absence of a valid SSL certificate is a critical vulnerability, exposing users to potential data interception. No security headers or incident response policies are evident, indicating room for significant improvement in security posture. Privacy and cookie policies are present and appear comprehensive, supporting GDPR compliance. Overall, while the website provides valuable content and maintains good business credibility, the lack of HTTPS and security best practices lowers its security score and user trust. Strategic improvements in SSL deployment, security headers, and incident response readiness are recommended to enhance the site's security and compliance standing.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
18/ 100 · Critical
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

6 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.

    • Critical

      EU business without adequate privacy measures

      EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

      What to do: Implement comprehensive GDPR compliance including privacy policy, cookie consent, and data protection measures

    • 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

  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 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';…

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

Keep watching copolad.eu

This scan found 19 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
50
Security headers
15
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
18
Average
53

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

Copolad operates as a medium-sized government/non-profit entity focused on drug policy cooperation across Latin America, the Caribbean, and the EU. Its competitive advantage lies in EU funding and established partnerships with reputable organizations such as FIIAPP, IILA, EMCDDA, and GIZ. The business model centers on policy cooperation, training, and knowledge dissemination. The website targets government agencies, NGOs, and policy makers, providing them with resources, news, and event information. Growth indicators include active news updates and training offerings. The partnership ecosystem is strong, with multiple international collaborators featured prominently. The site’s multilingual support and content breadth reflect a mature operation with strategic regional focus.

Security posture

The current security maturity level is low due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and lack of security headers. This exposes the site and its users to risks such as data interception and man-in-the-middle attacks. No explicit incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are found, indicating limited readiness for security incidents. Privacy policies are comprehensive, supporting GDPR compliance, but security culture indicators such as secure forms and session management are not evident. The use of multiple third-party plugins increases the attack surface, necessitating regular updates and audits. Overall, the security posture requires urgent improvements to meet modern standards and protect user data effectively.

Recommendations

  1. Install and maintain a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Implement security headers including HSTS, Content Security Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Develop and publish an incident response and vulnerability disclosure policy to improve security transparency and readiness.
  4. Regularly audit and update all plugins and themes to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance user trust by adding visible security indicators and improving site performance.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with a rich set of plugins including WP Rocket for caching, WPML for multilingual support, Ajax Search Pro, Mailchimp integration, and event management tools. The tech stack includes jQuery and WPBakery Page Builder. Hosting is provided by Arsys Internet S.L.U. Performance is slow with a load time of approximately 18.9 seconds and a large page size (~518 KB). Mobile optimization is good, and SEO practices are well implemented with proper meta tags and structured data. Accessibility is basic but present. The lack of HTTPS and security headers is a significant technical risk. Opportunities exist to improve performance and security to enhance user experience and trust.
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 copolad.eu. 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 copolad.eu.

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.