Skip to main content

Security report for freecodecamp.com

Redirects to www.freecodecamp.org; the website checks ran on that page, the DNS and email checks on freecodecamp.com.

freeCodeCamp · Education · United States

Low risk. 1 critical or high finding in GDPR outside view.

Security score

93/100

Risk levelLow

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

freeCodeCamp.org is a well-established nonprofit educational platform founded in 2014, dedicated to providing free coding courses and certifications globally. The website offers a comprehensive curriculum covering programming, DevOps, cybersecurity, AI engineering, and language skills for developers. It targets individuals seeking accessible, high-quality education in technology without cost barriers. The platform enjoys a strong market position as a leading free coding education provider with a large and active user community. Technically, the website leverages modern web technologies including React and Gatsby, ensuring fast performance, mobile optimization, and good accessibility. Integration with Stripe for payment processing and Google Tag Manager for analytics reflects a mature digital infrastructure. The site maintains good SEO practices and a professional design, enhancing user experience and engagement. From a security perspective, freeCodeCamp employs HTTPS with strong SSL configuration and security headers such as CSP and HSTS. While no critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected, the site lacks a publicly available formal security policy or incident response plan. Privacy compliance is well addressed with clear privacy and cookie policies, including GDPR considerations. However, direct security contact channels and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are absent. Overall, freeCodeCamp.org presents a low-risk profile with high trustworthiness and professionalism. Strategic improvements in formalizing security policies and incident response communications would further strengthen its security posture and stakeholder confidence.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

NIS2 outside view
95/ 100 · Low
GDPR outside view
75/ 100 · Medium
Checks completed
9of 9

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

The NIS2 figure counts only evidence anyone can see from the internet. 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

1 finding 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

      Tracking cookies set without a consent banner

      Observed on the first page load as a new visitor, before any consent choice; Guard does not click the banner. The site set 2 analytics or marketing cookies: Google Analytics (_ga, _ga_SF1BGBDCNS). No consent banner or consent platform was detected (Guard scans from the EU, so EU-only banners would have been shown).

      What to do: Load analytics and marketing tags only after the visitor opts in, using a consent banner that offers accept and reject with equal prominence.

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

Keep watching freecodecamp.com

This scan found 10 issues across 5 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. 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. Payments by EveryPay; 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
97
Security headers
87
Email security
94
DNS health
95
Network security
100
Website hygiene
100
GDPR outside view
75
Average
93

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.
  • Accessibility: Accessibility is a separate readout from security, so it is reported but not scored. 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 freecodecamp.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
14,917
Employees
2
Customers
14,914
Third parties
1
Weak passwords
15%

Latest record dated 2026-01-13 · 18 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for freecodecamp.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • –freecodecamp.com2026-01-13
  • –www.freecodecamp.com2025-06-23

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)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

freeCodeCamp operates as a nonprofit in the education and technology sectors, offering free, open-source coding education worldwide. Its business model relies on donations and community contributions, supported by partnerships with payment processors like Stripe. The platform's competitive advantage lies in its comprehensive, accessible curriculum and strong community engagement. Target customers include aspiring developers, students, and professionals seeking skill advancement without financial cost. Growth indicators include a large graduate base and active forums. The partnership ecosystem includes major tech companies and open-source contributors, reinforcing its market presence and credibility.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, robust SSL configuration, and implementation of key security headers. No critical vulnerabilities or sensitive data exposures were found. Privacy policies are comprehensive and GDPR compliant. However, the absence of a formal security policy, incident response plan, and vulnerability disclosure process indicates room for improvement in security governance. The lack of direct security contact channels may delay incident reporting and response. Overall, the security culture appears proactive but could benefit from enhanced transparency and formal documentation.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a detailed security policy and incident response plan accessible on the website.
  2. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program and security.txt file.
  3. Provide direct security contact emails (e.g., security@freecodecamp.org) for incident reporting.
  4. Regularly review and audit third-party scripts and dependencies for vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance cookie consent mechanisms with granular user controls and transparency.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
freeCodeCamp
Description
freeCodeCamp.org is a nonprofit organization offering free coding courses, certifications, and programming tutorials to help individuals build skills in programming, DevOps, Cybersecurity, AI Engineering, and English for Developers.
Key services
Free coding courses, Certifications, Interactive coding challenges, Community forums
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
React, Gatsby, Stripe, Font Awesome, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics
Frameworks
React, Gatsby
Platforms
Web
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of CSP
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure forms with proper input types

Analytics and tracking

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

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is rich, well-structured, and professionally presented.
  3. Strong nonprofit educational focus with extensive free resources.
  4. Use of modern web technologies and good security practices.
  5. No suspicious or malicious elements detected.
  6. Privacy and cookie policies are present and GDPR compliant.
  7. No direct company contact emails or phone numbers publicly listed.
  8. No explicit security policy or incident response information found.
Technical notes

Notes

freeCodeCamp.org is built on a modern, performant tech stack using React and Gatsby, enabling fast load times and excellent mobile responsiveness. The site uses Stripe for payment processing and integrates Google Tag Manager and Analytics for data insights. The infrastructure appears well-maintained with no visible technical debt or deprecated technologies. Accessibility and SEO optimizations are implemented effectively. Hosting details are not explicit but likely involve cloud services. Opportunities exist to further modernize by adopting automated security scanning and continuous integration for dependency management.
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 freecodecamp.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 freecodecamp.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.