Skip to main content

Security report for firefox.com

Mozilla · Technology · N/a

Low risk. No critical or high findings.

Security score

86/100

Risk levelLow

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

The website www.firefox.com serves as the official download and informational portal for the Firefox browser, a product of Mozilla, a well-known non-profit organization dedicated to internet health and privacy. The site offers comprehensive information about Firefox's features, download options for multiple platforms, and strong emphasis on user privacy and security. The brand is positioned as a leading privacy-focused browser with a large global user base and a commitment to open source principles. Technically, the website employs modern web technologies including JavaScript, CSS, and HTML5, along with third-party services like Sentry for error monitoring and Google Tag Manager for analytics. The site is well-optimized for performance, mobile responsiveness, and SEO, providing an excellent user experience. Privacy compliance is robust, with clear privacy and cookie policies and consent mechanisms in place. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and implements cookie consent banners, but lacks explicit security headers and published security policies or incident response information. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the content. The absence of WHOIS data for the domain www.firefox.com is notable and reduces trust slightly, though the website content aligns strongly with Mozilla's official branding and services. Overall, the website demonstrates a strong security posture, excellent content quality, and good privacy compliance, making it a trustworthy source for Firefox browser downloads and information. Strategic improvements include publishing explicit security headers, incident response policies, and clearer contact information to enhance trust and security transparency.

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

No critical or high findings. These medium findings are worth fixing next.

  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.

    • Medium

      Missing X-XSS-Protection header

      Legacy XSS protection (deprecated but still recommended)

      What to do: Add "X-XSS-Protection: 1; mode=block"

    • Medium

      Missing Permissions-Policy header

      Controls browser features and APIs

      What to do: Implement a Permissions-Policy to restrict feature access

      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Permissions-Policy: accelerometer=(), autoplay=(), camera=(), cross-origin-isolated=(),…

  2. GDPR outside view

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

    • Medium

      Privacy policy may not be GDPR compliant

      Privacy policy lacks explicit GDPR compliance elements

      What to do: Update privacy policy to explicitly address GDPR requirements and user rights

  3. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Medium

      No DKIM record found

      DKIM adds cryptographic signatures to emails

      What to do: Configure DKIM with your email provider

    • Medium

      No MTA-STS Policy

      MTA-STS enforces TLS for email delivery

      What to do: Implement MTA-STS to prevent downgrade attacks

Keep watching firefox.com

This scan found 13 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
95
Security headers
75
Email security
70
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
86

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

Mozilla operates www.firefox.com as a key digital asset to distribute its flagship product, the Firefox browser. The business model is non-profit and open source, focusing on privacy and user empowerment. The website targets a broad audience including general internet users, privacy-conscious individuals, and enterprise customers. Mozilla's market position is strong as a leading alternative to mainstream browsers, emphasizing privacy and customization. The site integrates with Mozilla's broader ecosystem including support, add-ons, and community engagement platforms. The absence of WHOIS data for the domain suggests possible domain management or privacy protection practices, but does not detract from Mozilla's established reputation. The website's extensive localization and multi-platform support indicate a global reach and mature digital strategy.

Security posture

The website exhibits a mature security posture with mandatory HTTPS and privacy-focused features such as cookie consent banners. Use of Sentry for error tracking indicates proactive monitoring. However, the lack of explicit security headers (e.g., Content Security Policy, HSTS) and absence of published security or incident response policies represent gaps in transparency and defense-in-depth. No direct contact channels for security incidents or vulnerability disclosures were found, which could hinder timely communication in case of security events. The missing WHOIS data for the domain is unusual for a major brand and warrants further investigation. Overall, the site is secure for users but could improve in formalizing and communicating its security governance and incident response capabilities.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish explicit security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options to enhance browser security.
  2. Create and make publicly accessible a security policy and incident response page detailing procedures and contact points for security issues.
  3. Provide clear vulnerability disclosure guidelines and security contact information to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Add verified company contact information on the website to improve transparency and user trust.
  5. Investigate and resolve the missing WHOIS data for the www.firefox.com domain to strengthen domain legitimacy and trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Mozilla
Description
Firefox is a free web browser backed by Mozilla, a non-profit dedicated to internet health and privacy. It offers faster page loading, less memory usage, and privacy-focused features.
Key services
Firefox Browser for desktop and mobile, Privacy and security features, Add-ons and extensions, Enterprise browser solutions
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, CSS, HTML5, Sentry (error tracking), Google Tag Manager
Platforms
Windows, Mac, Linux, Android, iOS
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent banner implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of Sentry for error monitoring

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager, Sentry
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Sentry
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and no blocking detected.
  2. Strong privacy and cookie consent mechanisms implemented.
  3. No direct company contact emails or phone numbers found on the page.
  4. No explicit security or incident response policies published on the site.
  5. Website uses modern web technologies and good SEO practices.
  6. WHOIS data for domain is missing, which is unusual for a major brand.
  7. Social media presence is strong and consistent with Mozilla branding.
  8. No adult or questionable content detected; content is safe for general audiences.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern web standards with clean HTML5, CSS, and JavaScript. It leverages third-party services like Sentry for error monitoring and Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing. The site is highly performant, mobile-optimized, and accessible, with comprehensive localization support. No CMS was explicitly detected, suggesting a custom or static site architecture. Hosting details are not explicitly available from the content. The technical implementation supports a fast, reliable, and user-friendly experience, though there is room for improvement in security header implementation and formal security 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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 86/100 +2Low22 findingsView report
  2. 84/100Low23 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with firefox.com. 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 firefox.com.

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.