Skip to main content

Security report for cost.eu

COST - European Cooperation in Science and Technology · Government · N/a

Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

58/100

Risk levelMedium

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

COST - European Cooperation in Science and Technology is a European intergovernmental framework that funds and supports science and technology research networks known as COST Actions. The organization connects researchers and innovators across Europe and beyond, facilitating collaboration and knowledge sharing. The website reflects a professional and well-structured digital presence, targeting researchers, scientific communities, and policy makers. It provides information about funding opportunities and networking services, positioning itself as a key player in European scientific cooperation. The technical infrastructure is based on WordPress with modern SEO and event management plugins, ensuring good performance, mobile optimization, and accessibility. The site uses HTTPS with a strong SSL configuration and integrates analytics tools such as Microsoft Clarity and Matomo for user behavior insights. Cookie consent is managed via Cookiebot, indicating attention to privacy compliance, although explicit privacy and terms of service pages are not detected. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and cookie consent, but the absence of explicit security headers and vulnerability disclosure policies suggests room for improvement. No critical vulnerabilities or suspicious content were found. The domain WHOIS data is privacy protected, which is typical for European organizations, and the website's content and social media presence support its legitimacy. Overall, the website is trustworthy, professional, and well-maintained, with recommendations to enhance privacy transparency and security headers to further strengthen its security and compliance stance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 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

9 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 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

  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 cost.eu

This scan found 26 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
57
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
58

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

COST operates as a government/non-profit entity focused on funding and networking scientific research across Europe. Its market position is strong within the European research ecosystem, providing essential services that enable collaboration and innovation. The business model revolves around facilitating COST Actions, which are research networks funded to promote interdisciplinary cooperation. The target audience includes researchers, academic institutions, and policy makers. The organization leverages partnerships and social media to maintain visibility and engagement. Growth indicators include active funding calls and a broad network of participants. The website's professional design and content quality reflect a mature digital presence aligned with its mission. Competitive advantages include its pan-European reach, official backing, and established funding mechanisms. Revenue streams are likely public funding and grants. The partnership ecosystem includes various European scientific and governmental bodies. Strategic observations suggest continued investment in digital transparency and security could enhance stakeholder trust and compliance with evolving regulations.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with HTTPS enforced and cookie consent implemented, reflecting compliance with basic privacy regulations. However, the lack of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options indicates potential gaps in defense-in-depth strategies. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the provided content. The absence of a published vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file limits transparency and incident response readiness. Contact information for security incidents is not explicitly provided, which could delay response times in case of security events. Compliance with GDPR is partially indicated by the cookie consent mechanism, but the missing privacy policy reduces overall compliance confidence. The organization should consider publishing detailed security policies and contact channels to improve security culture and readiness. Overall, the security posture is good but can be enhanced with additional best practices and transparency measures.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service pages to improve transparency and compliance.
  2. Implement standard security headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options) to strengthen security posture.
  3. Provide explicit contact information for security incidents and consider publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file.
  4. Enhance DNS security by enabling DNSSEC if not already active.
  5. Regularly review and update third-party libraries and plugins to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
COST - European Cooperation in Science and Technology
Description
COST funds science & technology research networks known as COST Actions that connect researchers & innovators across Europe & beyond.
Key services
Funding research networks, Connecting researchers, Supporting COST Actions
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Yoast SEO, Event Espresso, MapsVG, Select2, jQuery
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent banner

Analytics and tracking

Services
Microsoft Clarity, Matomo
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Microsoft Clarity, Matomo
Marketing tools
Cookiebot
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. WHOIS data is unavailable due to privacy protection by EURid.
  3. Website uses HTTPS with good SSL configuration.
  4. Cookie consent is implemented via Cookiebot.
  5. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages found in the scanned content.
  6. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the content.
  7. Social media presence is strong with official accounts on Facebook, Twitter (X), Instagram, LinkedIn, YouTube, and SoundCloud.
  8. Website is built on WordPress with several plugins for SEO, event management, and maps.
  9. Tracking includes Microsoft Clarity and Matomo analytics.
  10. No signs of adult or questionable content; content is scientific and governmental.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress, utilizing plugins such as Yoast SEO for search engine optimization, Event Espresso for event management, and MapsVG for interactive maps. The presence of Select2 and jQuery libraries indicates use of common JavaScript tools for UI enhancements. The site loads resources from reputable CDNs and integrates analytics tools like Microsoft Clarity and Matomo for user behavior tracking. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and accessibility features. The site uses cookie consent via Cookiebot, indicating attention to privacy compliance. There is no evidence of outdated or vulnerable libraries in the scanned content. Technical risks include missing security headers and lack of explicit privacy and terms pages, which could impact compliance and security posture. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern and well-maintained with opportunities for further hardening.
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 cost.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 cost.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.