Skip to main content

Security report for freejournals.org

Free Journal Network · Non-profit · United States

High risk. 11 critical or high findings in Network security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

45/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Free Journal Network (FJN) is a small nonprofit organization based in the United States, founded in 2018, dedicated to promoting scholarly journals that adhere to the Fair Open Access model. The organization supports academic journals by facilitating coordination, funding, quality assurance, promotion, and advocacy for open access publishing without author fees. The website serves as an informational and organizational hub for members and interested parties in the scholarly publishing community. Technically, the website is built on WordPress, hosted by Bluehost, and uses common plugins and scripts such as Contact Form 7 and jQuery. The site is moderately optimized for performance and mobile use, with basic accessibility and SEO features. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enforced and domain transfer protection, but lacks DNSSEC and security headers, representing areas for improvement. Privacy compliance is weak due to the absence of privacy and cookie policies. Overall, the website is trustworthy and professional but would benefit from enhanced security and privacy practices.

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

11 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: PostgreSQL

      Port 5432 (PostgreSQL) is publicly accessible - PostgreSQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to PostgreSQL using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
  2. 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 freejournals.org

This scan found 29 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
62
Security headers
15
Email security
85
DNS health
70
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
35
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 · found on this site
  • 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 freejournals.org, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for freejournals.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

FJN occupies a niche position in the academic publishing ecosystem, focusing on nonprofit, scholar-controlled open access journals. Its business model is membership-based without financial barriers, relying on community governance and funding efforts. The organization complements other discipline-specific open access initiatives and targets academics, journal editors, and researchers interested in fair publishing practices. The website content and structure reflect a clear mission and governance transparency, including bylaws and board information. The lack of direct contact emails or phone numbers on the homepage suggests a preference for controlled communication channels. The partnership with recognized open access organizations enhances credibility. Growth potential lies in expanding membership and funding support for journals adhering to Fair Open Access principles.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a baseline security posture with HTTPS enabled and domain transfer lock status. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options reduces its defense-in-depth. No explicit security or incident response policies are published, and no dedicated security contact channels are provided. The use of WordPress and common plugins necessitates regular updates and vulnerability management to mitigate risks. No signs of exposed sensitive data or malicious content were found. Privacy compliance gaps, particularly missing privacy and cookie policies, pose regulatory risks. Overall, the security posture is moderate but requires enhancements to align with best practices and compliance standards.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy with GDPR compliance considerations.
  2. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  3. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to harden the website.
  4. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
  5. Regularly audit and update WordPress core, themes, and plugins to mitigate vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Free Journal Network
Description
FJN is a nonprofit corporation registered in Massachusetts, USA, promoting scholarly journals run according to the Fair Open Access model. It is a membership organization with no financial requirement, run by an elected board of 9 people. The organization helps journals coordinate efforts, obtain funding, update acceptance criteria, promote journals and advocate for scholarly publishing improvements.
Key services
Coordination and best practice sharing for member journals, Funding acquisition for journal improvements, Updating quality acceptance criteria, Promotion of Fair Open Access model, Advocacy for scholarly publishing improvements
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, jQuery, MediaElement.js, Contact Form 7, Jetpack, Custom Twitter Feeds
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
65/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Domain status clientTransferProhibited

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a nonprofit academic resource promoting Fair Open Access journals.
  2. Content is well structured and informative with clear navigation.
  3. No privacy or cookie policies found, which is a compliance gap.
  4. No explicit contact emails or phone numbers found on the main page.
  5. Uses WordPress CMS with common plugins and scripts.
  6. No security headers detected in provided data; DNSSEC not enabled.
  7. No advertising or tracking scripts detected.
  8. No evidence of adult or questionable content.
  9. WHOIS data supports legitimacy and consistency.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a WordPress CMS platform hosted by Bluehost, utilizing standard web technologies including jQuery and MediaElement.js. The theme used is 'Iconic One' with custom CSS and JavaScript for navigation and Twitter feed integration. Performance is moderate with no major issues detected, and mobile optimization is good. SEO is basic with standard meta tags and RSS feeds but lacks advanced structured data like JSON-LD or Open Graph tags. Accessibility features are minimal but present. The site does not use advanced analytics or tracking tools, indicating a privacy-conscious approach. Technical debt appears low, but security enhancements and privacy compliance updates are recommended to modernize the infrastructure and reduce risk.
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 freejournals.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 freejournals.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.