Skip to main content

Security report for digitalscholar.org

Corporation for Digital Scholarship · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

65/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Corporation for Digital Scholarship is a US-based nonprofit organization founded in 2009, dedicated to developing and sustaining open-source software and services for researchers and cultural heritage institutions. Their portfolio includes well-known digital humanities tools such as Omeka, Zotero, Tropy, PressForward, and Sourcery, positioning them as a key player in the digital scholarship ecosystem. The website reflects a professional, well-structured digital presence with clear information about leadership, governance, and partnerships with reputable academic institutions. Technically, the site uses modern web standards with modular JavaScript and responsive design, though no advanced frameworks or CMS are detected. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS enabled and domain transfer protections, but lacks DNSSEC and visible security headers. Privacy compliance is weak due to absence of privacy and cookie policies. Overall, the site is trustworthy and professionally maintained but could improve in privacy and security transparency.

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

7 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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';…

  2. 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

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

Keep watching digitalscholar.org

This scan found 24 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
72
Security headers
15
Email security
85
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
65

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 organization operates as a nonprofit focusing on digital humanities and scholarly software development. Their business model centers on stewardship and sustainability of open-source projects, supported by partnerships with academic and cultural institutions. The target audience includes historians, researchers, and cultural heritage professionals. The presence of a clear leadership team and board of directors, along with governance policies, indicates mature organizational structure. The partnership ecosystem includes prominent universities and digital history centers, enhancing credibility and reach. Revenue streams likely include grants, donations, and service contracts related to software support and development. Growth indicators include ongoing project launches and sustained community engagement.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level. HTTPS is enforced, and domain registration includes clientTransferProhibited status, reducing risk of unauthorized transfers. However, DNSSEC is not enabled, and no security headers (such as CSP, HSTS, or X-Frame-Options) are detected in the provided data, which are recommended best practices. No explicit incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is published, limiting transparency in security management. No forms or input fields are present on the homepage, reducing attack surface. The absence of tracking scripts and analytics reduces privacy risks. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a nonprofit informational site but could be enhanced by implementing additional security controls and transparency measures.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy to improve GDPR and privacy compliance.
  2. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to enhance DNS security.
  3. Implement standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, and X-Frame-Options.
  4. Add a security.txt file and vulnerability disclosure policy to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  5. Consider adding explicit incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Corporation for Digital Scholarship
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Corporation for Digital Scholarship
Description
The Corporation for Digital Scholarship is a nonprofit organization dedicated to the development of software and services for researchers and cultural heritage institutions. They develop and operate software projects such as Omeka, Zotero, Tropy, PressForward, and Sourcery.
Key services
Omeka - web publishing platform for digital collections, Zotero - research assistant tool for collecting and citing research, Tropy - research photo management, PressForward - web content gathering and publishing, Sourcery - remote archive research connection
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript (ES Modules)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • Domain status clientTransferProhibited
  • Use of HTTPS (implied by URL https://digitalscholar.org/)

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a nonprofit digital scholarship organization with a clear mission and established software projects.
  2. No privacy or cookie policy pages found, which is a compliance gap.
  3. Governance policies are well documented and linked.
  4. No forms detected on the homepage; contact is via email link only.
  5. No analytics or tracking scripts detected in provided HTML.
  6. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure found.
  7. No phone numbers found; only email and physical address provided.
  8. Website is well designed, mobile optimized, and accessible.
  9. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with clean, modern HTML5 and CSS3, and uses JavaScript modules for interactivity. No heavy frameworks or CMS platforms are detected, suggesting a custom or lightweight static site approach. The site is mobile responsive and accessible, with good SEO meta tags including description and viewport settings. Performance appears moderate, with no obvious heavy external dependencies or tracking scripts. The hosting provider is not explicitly identified beyond the registrar information. Technical debt appears low, but opportunities exist to improve security configurations and privacy compliance. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a professional and user-friendly experience suitable for the organization's mission.
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 digitalscholar.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 digitalscholar.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.