Skip to main content

Security report for gnu.org

Free Software Foundation · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

54/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The GNU Project website, operated by the Free Software Foundation, serves as a comprehensive resource promoting free software and user freedoms. It provides detailed information about the GNU operating system, philosophy, licenses, and community engagement. The site targets free software users, developers, and advocates, positioning itself as a longstanding leader in the free software movement with a non-profit business model supported by donations and memberships. Technically, the website employs standard HTML5 and CSS3 with responsive design and multimedia content but lacks modern CMS or advanced frameworks. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and accessibility. Security posture is weak due to the absence of HTTPS and modern TLS protocols, no security headers, and no published security policies. Privacy compliance is minimal with no privacy or cookie policies detected. Contact information is available via email and a contact form, enhancing business credibility. Overall, the site is trustworthy and professional but requires urgent security improvements.

Scanned

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

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
40/ 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

4 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 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

    • 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 gnu.org

This scan found 19 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
50
Security headers
55
Email security
60
DNS health
80
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
40
Average
54

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 gnu.org, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
955
Employees
0
Customers
904
Third parties
51
Weak passwords
19%

13 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 gnu.org.

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

The Free Software Foundation, as the parent organization, underpins the GNU Project's mission to promote software freedom globally. The website reflects a mature, well-established entity with a clear advocacy and development focus in the technology and non-profit sectors. Its market position is strong within the free software community, leveraging a broad ecosystem of related sites and partnerships. Revenue streams likely include donations, memberships, and merchandise sales. The target audience includes software users, developers, educators, and activists. The partnership ecosystem includes hardware compatibility projects and community news aggregators. Strategic observations highlight the organization's commitment to transparency and community engagement but also reveal gaps in modern security and privacy compliance that could impact trust and legal adherence.

Security posture

The current security maturity level is low due to the lack of HTTPS, invalid SSL certificate, and absence of security headers. These issues expose users to risks such as data interception and downgrade attacks. No vulnerabilities like Heartbleed or POODLE were detected, but the lack of encryption is a critical flaw. Compliance gaps exist with GDPR and other privacy regulations due to missing privacy and cookie policies. Incident response readiness is not evident as no security or abuse contacts are published. The security culture appears minimal in terms of formal policies but benefits from SPF and DMARC email protections. Business impact includes potential loss of user trust and legal exposure. Immediate remediation is necessary to align with best practices and regulatory requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Implement HTTP security headers including HSTS, Content-Security-Policy, and X-Frame-Options.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  4. Establish and publicize a security policy and incident response contact information.
  5. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 or 1.3) and disable deprecated protocols.
  6. Consider adding a vulnerability disclosure policy and security.txt file to enhance transparency.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a straightforward technical infrastructure with static HTML and CSS, supplemented by HTML5 video elements for multimedia content. No major frameworks or CMS platforms are detected, indicating a custom or minimal content management approach. Hosting is associated with Gandi SAS as registrar, but hosting provider details are not explicit. Performance is moderate with a page load time of approximately 4.3 seconds and a page size of ~23 KB, which is reasonable. Mobile optimization and accessibility features are well implemented, including responsive design and skip links for navigation. SEO is supported by meta keywords, descriptions, and alternate language links. Technical risks include the absence of HTTPS and modern security protocols, which could impact user trust and search engine ranking.
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. 62/100Medium28 findingsView report
  2. 62/100Medium28 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with gnu.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 gnu.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.