Skip to main content

Security report for gizmodo.com

Gizmodo · Media · N/a

Medium risk. 2 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS and GDPR outside view.

Security score

71/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Gizmodo is a well-established digital media company specializing in technology news, reviews, science, and entertainment content. The website targets technology enthusiasts and the general public interested in the latest tech trends. It operates on an advertising-supported business model and maintains a strong market position as a reputable source of tech information. The site is built on WordPress CMS and leverages modern web technologies including Google Tag Manager, DoubleClick ads, and various ad SDKs, indicating a mature digital infrastructure. The hosting and DNS services are provided by OVH sas and Cloudflare respectively, ensuring reliable performance and security. Security posture is generally good with HTTPS enforced and domain registration protections in place, although DNSSEC is not enabled. Privacy compliance is weak due to the absence of visible privacy and cookie policies, which is a notable gap for GDPR and other regulations. The site uses extensive third-party advertising and tracking services, which may impact user privacy. Overall, the website is professional, trustworthy, and content-rich, but could improve transparency and compliance by publishing privacy and security policies.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
85/ 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

2 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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.

    • Critical

      Unable to retrieve SSL certificate

      Could not establish secure connection to retrieve certificate information

      What to do: Check if the server is accessible and SSL/TLS is properly configured

  2. GDPR outside view

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

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

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

Keep watching gizmodo.com

This scan found 10 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
0
Security headers
85
Email security
72
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
85
Average
71

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 gizmodo.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
567
Employees
0
Customers
530
Third parties
37
Weak passwords
31%

15 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 gizmodo.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

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

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Gizmodo operates in the media sector with a focus on technology and science content. It has a large audience and a strong brand presence, supported by consistent branding and high-quality content. The business model relies heavily on advertising revenue, utilizing multiple ad networks and tracking technologies. The company benefits from partnerships with major ad platforms and uses advanced analytics for audience insights. The lack of explicit contact and compliance information suggests a potential area for improvement in user trust and regulatory adherence. The domain age and registration details confirm a long-standing presence in the market, reinforcing its credibility. No suspicious or privacy-protected WHOIS data was found, supporting legitimacy. The company’s digital maturity is high, but privacy and security policy transparency could be enhanced to meet evolving compliance standards.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a solid security foundation with HTTPS enabled and domain status flags that prevent unauthorized transfers or deletions. The Content-Security-Policy header is set to upgrade insecure requests, which helps mitigate mixed content risks. However, DNSSEC is not enabled, which is a recommended best practice for DNS security. No direct evidence of security policies, incident response plans, or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms were found, indicating gaps in security transparency and readiness. The extensive use of third-party ad and tracking scripts introduces potential risks that require ongoing monitoring. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the provided content. Overall, the security posture is good but could be improved by publishing security policies, enabling DNSSEC, and implementing a security.txt file for vulnerability reporting.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy to improve GDPR and privacy compliance.
  2. Add terms of service and explicit security policy pages to enhance transparency and user trust.
  3. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to strengthen DNS security.
  4. Implement a security.txt file to facilitate vulnerability disclosure and incident reporting.
  5. Regularly audit and monitor third-party scripts and ad networks to mitigate security risks.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Gizmodo
Description
Dive into cutting-edge tech, reviews and the latest trends with the expert team at Gizmodo. Your ultimate source for all things tech.
Key services
Technology news, Product reviews, Science and space news, Entertainment and pop culture coverage
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress CMS, jQuery, Font Awesome, Google Tag Manager, Google DoubleClick for ads, Marfeel SDK, Opti-Digital ads, Connatix video player
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • ClientDeleteProhibited and ClientTransferProhibited domain status
  • Use of Content-Security-Policy header

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager)
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Ad networks
Google DoubleClick, Opti-Digital, Connatix
Tracking pixels
Connatix tracking pixel, Sirdata YouTube iframe tracking
Marketing tools
Consent Framework scripts
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professional, well-established technology news and media site.
  2. Content is rich, relevant, and well-structured with good SEO practices.
  3. No privacy or terms of service pages found in the provided content.
  4. Extensive use of third-party advertising and tracking scripts.
  5. No direct contact information or security policies found on the main page.
  6. Good security posture with HTTPS and domain protection flags but lacks DNSSEC.
  7. No evidence of adult or NSFW content.
  8. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with a modern tech stack including jQuery, Font Awesome, and various advertising SDKs. It uses Cloudflare for DNS and CDN services, which enhances performance and security. Google Tag Manager and DoubleClick are used for analytics and advertising, indicating advanced marketing infrastructure. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and accessibility features. Performance is moderate, with some heavy ad scripts that may impact load times. SEO is well-implemented with meta tags, Open Graph, and JSON-LD structured data. The site uses asynchronous loading for scripts to improve performance. Technical risks include reliance on multiple third-party ad and tracking services, which require careful management to avoid privacy and security issues. Overall, the technical infrastructure is robust and supports a high-quality user experience.
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 gizmodo.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 gizmodo.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.