Skip to main content

Security report for gijn.org

Global Investigative Journalism Network · Media · United States

Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

61/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Global Investigative Journalism Network (GIJN) is a well-established non-profit organization founded in 2009, dedicated to supporting investigative journalism worldwide. The organization offers training, resources, and networking opportunities to journalists and media professionals, positioning itself as a global leader in the investigative journalism sector. The website reflects this mission with comprehensive multilingual support and professional content tailored to its target audience of journalists and media educators. Technically, the site is built on WordPress, leveraging modern web technologies and integrations such as Google Analytics and reCAPTCHA to enhance user experience and security. While the site employs HTTPS and standard security measures, there is room for improvement in implementing advanced security headers and DNSSEC to bolster its security posture. Overall, GIJN's website demonstrates a high level of professionalism, trustworthiness, and compliance with privacy regulations, making it a reliable resource in its domain.

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

9 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 gijn.org

This scan found 25 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
57
Security headers
25
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
61

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

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 gijn.org, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for gijn.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

GIJN operates as a non-profit entity focusing on media and investigative journalism sectors. Its business model revolves around membership, training, and resource provision funded by donations and grants. The organization targets investigative journalists globally, offering multilingual content to maximize reach. GIJN maintains a strong market position as a trusted network and resource hub, supported by transparent domain registration and consistent branding. The absence of parent or subsidiary companies suggests an independent operational structure. The website's integration with fundraising tools and analytics indicates active engagement with its community and stakeholders.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses Google reCAPTCHA to protect forms from automated abuse, reflecting a baseline security posture. However, the lack of DNSSEC and advanced security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and HSTS indicates potential vulnerabilities to DNS spoofing and man-in-the-middle attacks. No evidence of exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries was found. The domain's clientDeleteProhibited status adds a layer of domain security. GIJN should consider enhancing its security headers and enabling DNSSEC to align with best practices and improve resilience against emerging threats.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC to secure DNS queries and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and HSTS.
  3. Conduct regular security audits of WordPress plugins and themes to identify vulnerabilities.
  4. Enhance privacy compliance by clearly documenting data retention policies.
  5. Promote incident response readiness by publishing a security or abuse contact policy.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Global Investigative Journalism Network
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Global Investigative Journalism Network
Description
A global network supporting investigative journalism worldwide by providing resources, training, and collaboration opportunities.
Key services
Journalism training, Resource sharing, Networking and collaboration, Events and conferences
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, PHP, JavaScript, Google reCAPTCHA, Font Awesome, Google Analytics, WPML (multilingual plugin)
Frameworks
WordPress theme framework
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
65/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA for forms
  • ClientDeleteProhibited domain status to prevent unauthorized deletion

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Fundraise Up
Marketing tools
Google Site Kit
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is professionally presented and relevant to investigative journalism.
  3. Multilingual support is extensive, indicating global outreach.
  4. Security headers are minimal; opportunity for improvement.
  5. WHOIS data is transparent and consistent with business claims.
  6. Use of Google Analytics and reCAPTCHA indicates standard tracking and bot protection.
  7. No explicit or adult content detected; safe for general audiences.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is powered by WordPress CMS with a custom theme and uses modern front-end technologies including JavaScript and Font Awesome icons. It integrates Google Analytics via Site Kit and employs Google reCAPTCHA for form security. Hosting is provided by GoDaddy, as indicated by WHOIS and nameservers. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and supports multiple languages via WPML plugin. Performance is moderate, with opportunities to optimize loading times and accessibility features. The technical stack is mature but could benefit from modernization in security configurations and enhanced SEO and accessibility compliance.
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 gijn.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 gijn.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.