Skip to main content

Security report for extensiblewebmanifesto.org

Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

75/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Extensible Web Manifesto website serves as a platform to promote a new philosophy for web standards development, emphasizing low-level capabilities and iterative JavaScript-based feature development. It targets web developers, standards committees, and browser vendors, positioning itself as a thought leadership and advocacy initiative within the technology sector. The site content is well-structured and professional, featuring notable industry signatories, but lacks commercial or transactional elements. Technically, the website uses standard web technologies including HTML5, CSS, JavaScript, Google Fonts, and integrates Google Analytics and AddThis for tracking and social sharing. The site is moderately optimized for performance and mobile use but lacks advanced accessibility and SEO features. No CMS or hosting provider details are evident. From a security perspective, the domain is stable and legitimate with a long registration period and appropriate domain status flags. However, the site lacks DNSSEC, security headers, and visible HTTPS enforcement details. Privacy and cookie policies are absent, which impacts compliance and user trust. Tracking technologies are present without clear consent mechanisms. Overall, the website is a credible and professional advocacy platform with moderate technical maturity and security posture. Strategic improvements in privacy compliance, security headers, and contact transparency would enhance trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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

5 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.

    • 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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, Google APIs

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

  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.

    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 384-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching extensiblewebmanifesto.org

This scan found 16 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
65
Security headers
80
Email security
85
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
75

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 Extensible Web Manifesto operates as a small-scale, community-driven initiative focused on influencing web standards and browser development. Its market position is that of a thought leader and advocate within the web technology ecosystem, leveraging the reputations of prominent industry figures as signatories. The business model is non-commercial, centered on advocacy and community engagement rather than revenue generation. The target audience includes web developers, standards bodies, and browser vendors. The initiative benefits from partnerships and references to established projects like Mozilla's X-Tags and Google's Polymer, indicating a collaborative ecosystem. Growth indicators are limited due to the non-commercial nature, but ongoing maintenance and signatory updates suggest sustained relevance.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic security posture with a legitimate domain registration and clientTransferProhibited status to prevent unauthorized transfers. However, the absence of DNSSEC, security headers, and visible HTTPS enforcement reduces its security maturity. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, and no privacy or cookie policies are present to address data protection compliance. Tracking technologies are used without explicit consent mechanisms, posing privacy risks. The site would benefit from implementing modern security headers, enabling DNSSEC, publishing privacy and cookie policies, and providing clear contact channels for security incidents to improve its security culture and compliance readiness.

Recommendations

  1. Enable HTTPS with a strong SSL/TLS configuration and verify its enforcement site-wide.
  2. Implement DNSSEC to enhance domain name system security.
  3. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies including GDPR compliance statements.
  5. Provide clear contact information and establish an incident response contact channel.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
A manifesto advocating for a new approach to web standards development that prioritizes low-level capabilities, developer feedback, and iterative JavaScript-based feature development to improve the web platform's extensibility and health.
Key services
Publishing manifesto and principles, Community engagement and signatory support, Promoting new web platform design principles
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS, JavaScript, Google Fonts (Chivo), Google Analytics, AddThis social sharing widget
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
50/100
Good practices seen
  • Domain status clientTransferProhibited to prevent unauthorized transfers

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
AddThis
Marketing tools
AddThis social sharing
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a manifesto advocating for changes in web standards development.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers provided on the site.
  4. Uses Google Analytics and AddThis for tracking and social sharing.
  5. No security headers or advanced security policies detected.
  6. WHOIS data shows domain is stable and consistent with the website's purpose.
  7. Content is technical and targeted at web developers and standards bodies.
  8. No commercial transactions or business contact information present.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with standard web technologies including HTML5, CSS, and JavaScript, and uses Google Fonts for typography. It integrates Google Analytics and AddThis for analytics and social sharing, respectively. The site does not appear to use a CMS or advanced frameworks. Performance is moderate with basic mobile optimization and accessibility features. SEO is basic with minimal meta tags and no structured data. The site is hosted on infrastructure using W3C TAG name servers, indicating a stable hosting environment. Technical debt is low due to the site's simplicity, but modernization opportunities include improved accessibility, SEO, and security hardening.
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 extensiblewebmanifesto.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 extensiblewebmanifesto.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.