Skip to main content

Security report for electiontruthalliance.org

Election Truth Alliance · Non-profit · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Election Truth Alliance is a small non-profit organization focused on exploring election fraud consequences and advocating for safeguarding the voting process to support a healthy democracy. The website serves as an informational and advocacy platform with integrated donation capabilities to support its mission. The organization maintains an active social media presence across major platforms to engage its target audience interested in election integrity. Technically, the website is built on WordPress using modern plugins and themes, with payment processing integrated via Stripe and PayPal. The site is hosted with reputable providers and uses HTTPS, but lacks DNSSEC and explicit privacy or security policies. Security posture is moderate with domain locking but could be improved with enhanced DNS security and formalized incident response documentation. Overall, the website is professional and functional but would benefit from improved privacy compliance and clearer contact information.

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. 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 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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, Google APIs

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

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

Keep watching electiontruthalliance.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. See sample alerts.

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
75
Security headers
50
Email security
80
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
73

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 in the non-profit advocacy sector, targeting individuals concerned with election integrity and democratic processes. Its business model relies on donations facilitated through an integrated payment system. The market position is niche, focusing on election fraud awareness and voting process protection. The website content and structured data indicate a consistent brand identity and a clear mission. The lack of detailed company contact information and privacy policies suggests room for maturity in governance and compliance. The presence of multiple payment gateways and social media channels indicates a strategy to maximize outreach and fundraising. The domain's recent registration date aligns with a newly founded entity, but the future creation date in WHOIS data is unusual and warrants verification.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and employs domain locking statuses to prevent unauthorized changes, which are positive security indicators. However, DNSSEC is not enabled, leaving DNS queries vulnerable to spoofing attacks. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure policy is present, limiting transparency for security researchers. The absence of privacy and cookie policies reduces compliance with GDPR and other data protection regulations. The use of reputable plugins and payment gateways suggests secure transaction handling, but regular audits are recommended to mitigate plugin vulnerabilities. Incident response mechanisms and security policies are not publicly documented, which could hinder timely response to security incidents. Overall, the security posture is moderate but can be significantly improved with enhanced DNS security, formal policies, and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms to improve GDPR compliance.
  3. Implement a security.txt file and vulnerability disclosure policy to facilitate responsible reporting.
  4. Add clear contact information including company emails and phone numbers for transparency and trust.
  5. Regularly audit and update WordPress plugins and themes to mitigate vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Election Truth Alliance
Description
Explore the consequences of election fraud and the importance of safeguarding the voting process for a healthy democracy.
Key services
Election fraud exploration, Voting process safeguarding advocacy, Educational content on democracy
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, PHP, JavaScript, Stripe payment gateway, WooCommerce, GiveWP donation plugin, Event Tickets plugin, Cloudflare DNS
Frameworks
WPSSO Core, Salient WordPress Theme
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Domain locked with multiple client prohibitions
  • Use of Cloudflare DNS for DNS management

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Mailchimp
Marketing tools
Mailchimp
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the site.
  3. Donation system is active with multiple payment gateways including Stripe and PayPal.
  4. Social media presence is well linked with official accounts on Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, Twitter, and YouTube.
  5. No direct company contact emails or phone numbers found on the main page or metadata.
  6. Use of modern WordPress plugins and theme with good SEO and structured data.
  7. DNSSEC is not enabled, which is a security improvement opportunity.
  8. WHOIS data shows domain creation date in the future, which is unusual and may indicate data error or placeholder.
  9. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure policy found.
  10. No incident response or security policy information available on the site.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress platform using the Salient theme and several plugins including GiveWP for donations, WooCommerce, and Event Tickets. It uses Stripe and PayPal for payment processing, integrating external scripts from trusted sources. The site is hosted with GoDaddy as registrar and uses Cloudflare for DNS management, providing performance and security benefits. The site is mobile optimized with good SEO practices including structured data (JSON-LD) and Open Graph metadata. Performance is moderate with some scope for improvement in loading speed and accessibility features. The domain registration data shows an anomaly with a future creation date, which should be verified. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid but could benefit from enhanced DNS security and formal compliance documentation.
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 electiontruthalliance.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 electiontruthalliance.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.