Skip to main content

Security report for eurobridge.org

European Bridge League · Other · N/a

High risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

45/100

Risk levelHigh

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

The European Bridge League (EBL) is a non-profit organization dedicated to administering the mind sport Bridge across Europe. The website serves as a central hub for governance, competitions, education, and community engagement for bridge players and national federations. The site is well-structured with clear navigation and consistent branding, targeting bridge enthusiasts, youth, and women players. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with a modern plugin stack including WPBakery, Slider Revolution, and EventON, and integrates Google Analytics and reCAPTCHA for analytics and security. While the site is accessible and mobile-optimized, it lacks explicit privacy and terms of service pages, and no direct contact information is found in the provided content. Security posture is moderate with some best practices like reCAPTCHA and cookie consent implemented, but missing security headers and unknown SSL status present risks. The WHOIS data is unavailable or malformed, limiting domain trust analysis. Overall, the website is functional and professional but would benefit from enhanced security measures and clearer privacy compliance documentation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
63/ 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. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

  2. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  3. 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 eurobridge.org

This scan found 17 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
0
Security headers
20
Email security
85
DNS health
80
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
63
Average
45

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention eurobridge.org, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for eurobridge.org right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

Monitor on Breach (opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

EBL holds a leading position as the European governing body for Bridge, offering a comprehensive range of services including regulation, competition organization, and education. The business model is typical of a sports federation, focusing on community development and event management rather than commercial revenue. The website reflects a medium-sized organization with a focus on transparency and member engagement. The presence of official social media channels supports community outreach. Lack of detailed company registration or VAT information is typical for non-profit sports bodies but limits business credibility signals. The partnership ecosystem includes links to Google services and Adobe for document signing but no direct business partners or subsidiaries are identified.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security posture with implementation of Google reCAPTCHA to mitigate automated abuse and a cookie consent mechanism indicating awareness of privacy regulations. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security reduces protection against common web attacks. The unknown SSL configuration is a concern; HTTPS enforcement is critical for user trust and data protection. No evidence of incident response or security policy documentation was found. The lack of WHOIS transparency further complicates trust assessment. Regular security audits and improvements in header configurations are recommended to elevate security maturity.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce HTTPS site-wide with a valid SSL certificate.
  2. Add essential security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Publish clear and comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service pages.
  4. Provide explicit contact information including company emails and phone numbers for transparency.
  5. Conduct regular security audits and update WordPress core and plugins promptly to mitigate vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
European Bridge League
Description
The European Bridge League (EBL) administers the mind sport Bridge in Europe, organizing competitions, education, and governance for member federations.
Key services
Governance and regulation of bridge in Europe, Organization of European bridge competitions and championships, Education and training seminars and workshops, Youth and women bridge development programs
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.7.2, jQuery 3.7.1, Slider Revolution 5.4.1, WPBakery Page Builder, Google Analytics, Google reCAPTCHA, EventON plugin, td-composer plugin, hu-manity cookie consent scripts
Frameworks
WordPress CMS
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
60/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA for bot protection
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible with full content and navigation.
  2. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages detected.
  3. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented with high confidence.
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in provided content.
  5. Website uses WordPress with multiple plugins and Google Analytics.
  6. No security headers detected; SSL status unknown.
  7. WHOIS data is missing or malformed, limiting domain trust analysis.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a mature WordPress platform using a variety of plugins for enhanced functionality such as event management, page building, and comment handling. The tech stack includes jQuery, Slider Revolution, WPBakery, and Google services for analytics and maps. Performance is moderate with room for optimization. Mobile responsiveness is good, but accessibility features appear basic. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and structured navigation. The site uses external CDNs for fonts and scripts, which is standard practice. Technical debt may arise from multiple plugins and custom scripts; ongoing maintenance is essential to ensure stability and security.
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 eurobridge.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 eurobridge.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.