Skip to main content

Security report for gccommunityfund.org

Gold Coast Community Fund · Non-profit · Australia

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

65/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Gold Coast Community Fund is a small non-profit organization focused on providing financial assistance and support to individuals and charities in the Gold Coast region of Australia. Established since 2000, the organization operates through community fundraising events, donations, and volunteer efforts. Their website serves as a platform for applications for assistance, donation processing, volunteer registration, and event promotion. The organization maintains a consistent brand presence and leverages social media channels such as Facebook and LinkedIn to engage with the community. Technically, the website is built on WordPress using Elementor and WooCommerce, with integrations for Stripe and PayPal for payment processing. The site is mobile-optimized and demonstrates good SEO practices, though accessibility features are basic. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enforced and nonce tokens in forms, but lacks visible security headers and published security policies. Privacy and cookie policies are not found, indicating a gap in compliance. WHOIS data is malformed and incomplete, limiting domain trust verification, but the website content and social presence support legitimacy. Overall, the site is professional and trustworthy but would benefit from enhanced privacy compliance and security transparency.

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

8 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 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';…

  2. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

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

Keep watching gccommunityfund.org

This scan found 24 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. See sample alerts.

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
40
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
65

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 Gold Coast Community Fund operates in the non-profit sector, targeting local community members, charities, donors, and volunteers. Their business model revolves around fundraising events, donations, and volunteer engagement to support financial hardship relief. The organization has a strong local market position with over 20 years of history and significant funds raised. Their partnership with PayPal for donations indicates a reliable payment infrastructure. The website content and event promotion suggest active community involvement and networking with local business leaders. Growth indicators include ongoing events and volunteer recruitment. The absence of detailed business registration information on the site or WHOIS data is a minor limitation but does not detract from their community presence. Strategic observations include the need to improve privacy and security policies to align with best practices and regulatory requirements.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enabled and secure form handling via nonce tokens. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options reduces the overall security posture. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The lack of published security or incident response policies and absence of a vulnerability disclosure program indicate gaps in security governance. The use of third-party scripts like Metricool introduces moderate tracking but no apparent security risks. Overall, the site is secure for general use but should enhance security headers, publish security policies, and implement a vulnerability disclosure process to improve resilience and compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce security headers including CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection to strengthen browser security.
  2. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with explicit consent mechanisms to improve GDPR and privacy compliance.
  3. Develop and make publicly available security and incident response policies to enhance transparency and preparedness.
  4. Establish a vulnerability disclosure program and security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting and improve security culture.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party plugins and scripts to mitigate potential vulnerabilities and maintain a secure technology stack.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Gold Coast Community Fund
Description
The Gold Coast Community Fund (GCCF) aims to relieve financial hardship which is determined on a case by case assessment of a beneficiary’s or charities genuine financial need.
Key services
Financial assistance applications, Community fundraising events, Volunteer coordination, Donation processing
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, WooCommerce, Elementor, jQuery, LiteSpeed Cache, Google Maps API, Stripe Checkout, Font Awesome
Frameworks
Elementor, WooCommerce
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of nonce tokens in forms
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Metricool
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
metricool
Marketing tools
Metricool
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a well-structured non-profit community fund site focused on the Gold Coast region.
  2. Content is rich with calls to action for donations, volunteering, and assistance applications.
  3. No privacy or cookie policies are explicitly found on the homepage or linked pages.
  4. WHOIS data is unavailable or malformed, limiting domain trust verification.
  5. No visible security headers detected in the HTML source.
  6. Uses modern WordPress plugins and frameworks with some tracking via Metricool.
  7. No adult or questionable content detected; site is safe for general audiences.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress platform using Elementor for page building and WooCommerce for e-commerce capabilities, primarily for donation processing. It integrates Stripe and PayPal for payment services and uses Google Maps API for location services. The site employs LiteSpeed Cache for performance optimization and includes common JavaScript libraries such as jQuery and Font Awesome icons. Performance is moderate with good mobile responsiveness and SEO optimization. Accessibility features are basic and could be improved. The technical infrastructure is sound but would benefit from enhanced security configurations and privacy compliance implementations to reduce technical debt and improve user trust.
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 gccommunityfund.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 gccommunityfund.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.