Skip to main content

Security report for ehaweb.org

European Hematology Association · Healthcare · Netherlands

Medium risk. 2 critical or high findings in Security headers and Network security.

Security score

66/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The European Hematology Association (EHA) operates a professional website focused on advancing hematology knowledge, collaboration, and education within the European healthcare community. The organization is well-established, with a domain registered since 2000, and positions itself as a leading force in hematology. The website targets healthcare professionals, researchers, and clinicians interested in hematology, offering services such as knowledge sharing and community engagement. The business model is non-profit and educational in nature. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with modern frameworks like Bootstrap and integrates SEO tools such as Yoast. It employs Cookiebot for GDPR-compliant cookie consent management and Google Tag Manager for analytics. The site is mobile-optimized and demonstrates good accessibility and SEO practices, although performance is moderate. Hosting is provided by Hosting Concepts B.V., and the domain registration details are consistent with the organization's identity. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS with a good SSL configuration and implements cookie consent with granular user controls. However, some security headers like Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options are not explicitly detected, and there is no published security policy or incident response contact information. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found in the provided content. The WHOIS data is transparent and consistent, supporting the site's legitimacy. Overall, the website presents a professional and trustworthy digital presence with strong privacy compliance and a solid security posture. Strategic improvements include enabling DNSSEC, publishing security policies, and enhancing security headers to further strengthen the security framework.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 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. 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';…

  2. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • High

      High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

      Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

      What to do: Consider restricting access to FTP or implementing strong authentication

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

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

Keep watching ehaweb.org

This scan found 18 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
100
Security headers
55
Email security
75
DNS health
65
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
83
Average
66

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

EHA holds a strong market position as a leading European hematology association, focusing on education, research dissemination, and community collaboration. Its competitive advantage lies in its established reputation, comprehensive knowledge-sharing platform, and adherence to privacy regulations. The business model is non-profit, targeting healthcare professionals and researchers. Revenue streams likely include membership fees, event registrations, and educational resources. The partnership ecosystem includes major platforms like Cookiebot, Google, and social media channels for outreach. Growth indicators include a long domain history and consistent branding. Operationally, the organization maintains a professional web presence with modern technology and compliance focus.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with HTTPS enforced and a comprehensive cookie consent mechanism aligned with GDPR. The use of Cookiebot and Google Tag Manager with consent settings indicates privacy-aware analytics. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as CSP and X-Frame-Options, and lack of published security or incident response policies, represent areas for improvement. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. The WHOIS transparency and domain age support trustworthiness. Overall, the security maturity is good but can be enhanced by formalizing security policies and improving header configurations.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement and verify security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Publish a formal security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
  4. Add a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking tools to ensure compliance and minimize privacy risks.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
European Hematology Association
Description
EHA is the leading force in hematology, bringing the community together to share knowledge, collaborate, connect, and grow. Join us now, and enter a world of Borderless Hematology.
Key services
Knowledge sharing, Community collaboration, Educational events, Research dissemination
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Yoast SEO plugin, Bootstrap CSS, Swiper JS, Google Tag Manager, Cookiebot
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent with granular controls
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of Google Tag Manager with consent settings

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Hotjar
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Meta Platforms, Inc., Google, Twitter Inc.
Tracking pixels
Hotjar, Facebook Pixel, Twitter tracking
Marketing tools
Cookiebot
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website uses HTTPS with valid SSL
  2. Cookie consent implemented with detailed categories
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in provided HTML
  4. No terms of service page detected
  5. Use of modern web technologies and SEO best practices
  6. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure policy found
  7. WHOIS data is transparent and consistent with organization
  8. No signs of WAF or blocking mechanisms
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a WordPress CMS platform using Bootstrap for responsive design and Swiper for interactive elements. SEO is managed via Yoast plugin, and analytics are integrated through Google Tag Manager and Hotjar. Cookie consent is managed by Cookiebot with detailed user controls. Hosting is provided by Hosting Concepts B.V. The site shows good mobile optimization and accessibility features. Performance is moderate, suggesting potential for optimization. The technical stack is modern and well-maintained, with opportunities to enhance security headers and DNS configurations to reduce 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

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with ehaweb.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 ehaweb.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.