Skip to main content

Security report for debian.org

Debian · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

72/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Debian is a globally recognized open source operating system distribution maintained by a large community of volunteers. The website serves as a hub for project news, downloads, community engagement, and security advisories. It targets a broad audience including developers, users, and contributors interested in free software. The project is well-established with a strong reputation in the technology sector, particularly in Linux and open source communities. Technically, the website is built with standard HTML and CSS technologies, with no advanced frameworks detected. It is moderately optimized for performance and mobile devices, with good accessibility and SEO practices. The site uses HTTPS for secure form submissions but lacks visible advanced security headers or explicit security policies. From a security perspective, the site shows good basic practices such as no exposed sensitive data and secure form handling. However, the absence of explicit privacy, cookie, and security policies, as well as missing WHOIS registration details, limits the overall trust and compliance posture. There is no evidence of vulnerability disclosure mechanisms or incident response contacts. Overall, Debian's website is trustworthy and professional, reflecting the project's maturity and community-driven nature. Strategic improvements in transparency around privacy, security policies, and WHOIS data would enhance trust and compliance. The site is safe for general audiences with no adult or questionable content detected.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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

6 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 debian.org

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
95
Security headers
70
Email security
40
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
72

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

Debian operates as a non-commercial, community-driven open source project providing a free operating system distribution. Its market position is strong within the open source and Linux ecosystem, serving a global user base. The business model relies on volunteer contributions and community engagement rather than direct revenue. Key services include OS distribution, security advisories, user support, and community events. The project maintains a broad partnership ecosystem with related Debian domains and infrastructure. Growth indicators include regular releases and active community events such as DebConf. The website reflects a mature, stable operation with consistent branding and high content quality.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic to moderate security maturity level. HTTPS is used for form submissions, and no sensitive data exposure or vulnerable libraries are evident. However, the lack of security headers, explicit security policies, vulnerability disclosure mechanisms, and incident response contacts indicates gaps in security best practices. The incomplete WHOIS data further reduces domain trustworthiness. Compliance with privacy regulations such as GDPR is not clearly demonstrated due to missing privacy and cookie policies. The security culture appears focused on openness and community but would benefit from formalized policies and transparency to improve risk management and incident readiness.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve GDPR compliance and user trust.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, and X-Frame-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Publish a security.txt file and vulnerability disclosure policy to facilitate responsible reporting and incident response.
  4. Improve WHOIS data transparency by ensuring registrar and registrant information is complete and accurate.
  5. Consider adding explicit incident response contact channels (e.g., security@ or abuse@ emails) to improve security communication.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Debian
Description
Debian is an operating system and a distribution of Free Software. It is maintained and updated through the work of many users who volunteer their time and effort.
Key services
Operating system distribution, Security advisories, User support, Community engagement
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS, WML 2.32.0
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of HTTPS (implied by search form action URL)
  • No visible exposed sensitive data
  • No vulnerable libraries detected

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and community focus.
  2. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on main page.
  3. WHOIS data is unavailable or malformed, limiting domain trust verification.
  4. No security.txt or explicit vulnerability disclosure found.
  5. No advertising or tracking detected, indicating privacy-respecting approach.
  6. Contact email is webmaster@debian.org, consistent with domain.
  7. Site uses HTTPS for search form submission.
  8. No social media links explicitly found in main HTML content.
  9. Multiple external Debian-related domains linked, indicating ecosystem connectivity.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a simple, clean HTML and CSS structure with no detected CMS or advanced frameworks. The meta tags are well-formed, supporting SEO and mobile optimization. The site includes a search form that submits queries securely via HTTPS. Performance is moderate with no obvious issues, and accessibility features such as skip links and language selectors are present. The technical stack is minimalistic, reflecting the project's focus on stability and broad compatibility rather than cutting-edge web technologies. Opportunities exist to modernize security configurations and enhance privacy compliance features.
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. 72/100 −2Medium28 findingsView report
  2. 74/100Medium23 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with debian.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 debian.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.