Skip to main content

Security report for four-paws.org

VIER PFOTEN International – gemeinnützige Privatstiftung · Non-profit · Austria

High risk. 7 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

42/100

Risk levelHigh

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

FOUR PAWS International is a globally recognized non-profit animal welfare organization dedicated to protecting animals under human influence. The organization operates multiple country offices and campaigns worldwide, focusing on rescue missions, veterinary care, sterilization of stray animals, and advocacy against animal cruelty. Their website reflects a professional and comprehensive digital presence, targeting animal welfare supporters, donors, and volunteers. Technically, the site is built on the Neos CMS platform using the Flow PHP framework, incorporating modern JavaScript libraries such as Splide.js and Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing. However, a critical security weakness is the absence of a valid SSL certificate and lack of TLS protocol support, which significantly undermines the site's security posture. Privacy and cookie policies are well implemented and GDPR compliant, enhancing user trust. Overall, the site demonstrates strong business credibility and content quality but requires urgent improvements in SSL/TLS security to protect user data and maintain trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 100 · Critical
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

7 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

    • 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

  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 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 four-paws.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. 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
50
Email security
50
DNS health
50
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
Average
42

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 holds a strong market position as a leading global animal welfare NGO with a broad international footprint. Its business model relies on donations, sponsorships, and advocacy campaigns, supported by a well-structured network of country offices. The website showcases key services including rescue missions, sanctuaries, education, and campaigns targeting animal cruelty in various sectors. The presence of multiple social media channels and detailed contact information supports a robust partnership ecosystem and community engagement. The organization's branding is consistent and professional, reinforcing its credibility and trustworthiness in the non-profit sector.

Security posture

The current security posture reveals significant vulnerabilities primarily due to the lack of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols, exposing the site to potential interception and man-in-the-middle attacks. While some security headers like Strict-Transport-Security, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options are present, their effectiveness is limited without proper HTTPS enforcement. No advanced security policies or incident response contacts are found, indicating room for improvement in security governance. The site does not expose sensitive data or use vulnerable libraries, but the SSL/TLS deficiencies are critical and must be addressed immediately to safeguard user interactions and data.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 or TLS 1.3) and configure strong cipher suites.
  3. Enhance security headers by enabling HSTS with includeSubDomains and preload options.
  4. Implement OCSP stapling and session resumption to improve SSL performance and security.
  5. Establish a clear security policy and incident response contact channels to improve transparency and readiness.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
VIER PFOTEN International – gemeinnützige Privatstiftung
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern and scalable technology stack centered around the Neos CMS and Flow PHP framework. It leverages JavaScript libraries such as Splide.js for carousels and Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing integrations. The site is hosted on Hetzner infrastructure, inferred from internal context. Performance metrics indicate slow loading times, possibly due to large media assets and lack of optimization. Mobile optimization and accessibility are rated good, with responsive design and semantic HTML usage. SEO is well addressed with proper meta tags, Open Graph data, and structured JSON-LD markup. Technical debt is minimal, but the absence of valid SSL/TLS is a major risk factor that could impact user trust and search engine rankings.
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 four-paws.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 four-paws.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.