Global Legal Entity Identifier Foundation (GLEIF) · Finance · Switzerland
Low risk. No critical or high findings.
The Global Legal Entity Identifier Foundation (GLEIF) operates as a non-profit organization dedicated to managing and ensuring the integrity of the Global Legal Entity Identifier System. It serves a critical role in the financial and regulatory sectors by providing standardized entity identification services worldwide. The organization is well-positioned globally, supported by regulatory oversight bodies such as the Financial Stability Board and the Regulatory Oversight Committee, and offers a range of services including LEI issuance, data quality management, and digital verification through verifiable LEIs (vLEI). Technically, the website employs a modern technology stack including jQuery, Lodash, MathJax, and Cookiebot for privacy compliance. It integrates security features such as Google reCAPTCHA and Twitter tracking pixels, and demonstrates good performance and mobile optimization. The site is well-structured with comprehensive content and clear navigation, reflecting a mature digital presence. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS, implements multiple security headers, and holds ISO 20000 certification, indicating adherence to IT service management standards. However, there is no publicly available security.txt or explicit incident response contact, which could be improved to enhance transparency and vulnerability management. Overall, the website presents a high level of trustworthiness and professionalism, with strong compliance and business credibility. The absence of WHOIS data is likely due to privacy protection and does not detract from the legitimacy of the organization. Strategic recommendations include publishing a security.txt file, enhancing incident response disclosures, and maintaining regular audits of third-party components to sustain security posture.
Scanned
NIS2 Art. 21(2)
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.
No critical or high findings. These medium findings are worth fixing next.
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.
Controls browser features and APIs
What to do: Implement a Permissions-Policy to restrict feature access
These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.
Privacy policy lacks explicit GDPR compliance elements
What to do: Update privacy policy to explicitly address GDPR requirements and user rights
SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.
DKIM adds cryptographic signatures to emails
What to do: Configure DKIM with your email provider
MTA-STS enforces TLS for email delivery
What to do: Implement MTA-STS to prevent downgrade attacks
TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.
SSL certificate expires in 44 days
What to do: Plan SSL certificate renewal
This scan found 15 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.
€25per month
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.
€39.90one-time
Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.
Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.
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
Not counted
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.
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
Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.
Leaked records that mention gleif.org, from OffSeq Breach.
4 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 gleif.org.
Select it in the checkout above.
Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.
Domains that imitate gleif.org and could be used for phishing or spoofed email, tracked in OffSeq Breach.
Last checked 2026-06-20
See the full lookalike list
A one-off add-on that lists up to 20 of the highest-risk lookalikes of gleif.org with registration, mail-server, certificate and DNS signals.
Select it in the checkout above.
Lookalike data refreshes continuously. Monitoring on Breach alerts you when a variant is registered, gains a mail server or starts serving HTTPS.
Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.
Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.
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
Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.
Reviews of this site
Share your experience with gleif.org. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.
Community rating
No published reviews yet. Be the first to review gleif.org.