Skip to main content

Security report for gamblingcontrol.org

Alderney Gambling Control Commission · Government · Guernsey

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Alderney Gambling Control Commission (AGCC) is an independent government regulatory body established in 2000 to oversee and regulate eGambling activities on behalf of the States of Alderney. The website serves as an official informational portal presenting the commission's role, regulatory framework, and contact details. The site is built on the Wix platform, leveraging Wix's Thunderbolt framework and standard web technologies. While the site is professionally designed and mobile-optimized, it lacks critical privacy and cookie policies, which are essential for compliance and user trust. The absence of WHOIS data transparency limits domain trust verification, although the business information and content strongly indicate legitimacy as a government entity. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS usage and some hardened scripts but lacks explicit security headers and incident response information.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of gamblingcontrol.org. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 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

3 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  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.

    • 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';…

  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 Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

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

Keep watching gamblingcontrol.org

This scan found 21 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
72
Security headers
35
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
Average
73

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

AGCC operates as a niche government regulator in the gambling sector, focusing on eGambling compliance and licensing. Its market position is authoritative within Alderney and relevant international gambling operators. The business model is regulatory oversight, funded likely by licensing fees and government support. The target audience includes gambling operators, industry stakeholders, and regulatory bodies. The website content is consistent and professional, supporting the commission's credibility. However, the lack of detailed policies and WHOIS transparency suggests areas for improvement in digital trust and compliance. No partnerships or subsidiaries are evident from the website content.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic to moderate security maturity level. HTTPS is enforced, and scripts indicate some security hardening measures. However, the absence of security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options reduces defense-in-depth. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response policies are published, which is a gap for a regulatory body. WHOIS privacy protection without transparency may be justified but reduces trust. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the analyzed content. Overall, the security posture is adequate but could be significantly improved with standard best practices and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with user consent mechanisms to ensure GDPR compliance.
  2. Add security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, etc.) to strengthen site security.
  3. Publish an incident response and vulnerability disclosure policy to enhance transparency and trust.
  4. Improve WHOIS data transparency or provide official verification to strengthen domain legitimacy.
  5. Enhance accessibility features and SEO optimization for better user experience and compliance.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Alderney Gambling Control Commission
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Alderney Gambling Control Commission
Description
The Alderney Gambling Control Commission (AGCC) was established in May 2000. The Commission, consisting of the Chairman and three members, is independent and non political, and regulates eGambling on behalf of the States of Alderney. The Commission ensures that its regulatory and supervisory approach meets the very highest of international standards.
Key services
eGambling regulation, Licensing, Supervision and compliance enforcement
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Wix.com Website Builder, JavaScript, Webpack, Core-js polyfills
Frameworks
Wix Thunderbolt
Platforms
Wix
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of HTTPS (implied by URL https://)
  • Hardened fetch and XHR scripts observed

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
basic
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is built on Wix platform with standard Wix scripts and styles
  2. No visible forms for data collection detected in provided HTML snippet
  3. Contact info limited to phone and postal address in structured data
  4. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service pages detected in HTML content
  5. No social media links or emails explicitly found
  6. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information present
  7. WHOIS data is unavailable or protected, limiting domain trust verification
  8. Website content is professional and consistent with a government regulator
  9. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Wix, using Wix Thunderbolt framework and standard JavaScript libraries. It uses webpack for bundling and includes polyfills for browser compatibility. Hosting is provided by Wix's infrastructure. Performance is moderate with standard Wix optimizations. Mobile optimization is good, but accessibility is basic. SEO metadata is present but could be enhanced. No custom backend or advanced technical infrastructure is evident. The site relies heavily on Wix's platform capabilities, which simplifies maintenance but limits customization. Technical risks are low but depend on Wix's platform security and uptime.
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. 73/100Medium29 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with gamblingcontrol.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 gamblingcontrol.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.