Skip to main content

Security report for googlesource.com

Google Open Source · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Google Open Source is a key initiative by Google LLC to foster open source innovation, collaboration, and sustainability. The website serves as a hub for open source projects, programs like Google Summer of Code, and community engagement. It targets developers and organizations interested in open source software, providing resources and support to both internal and external contributors. The site reflects Google's strong market position as a technology leader committed to open source principles. Technically, the website is built on Google's DevSite framework, hosted on Google Cloud Platform, and leverages modern web technologies including progressive web app features, Google Fonts, and Material Icons. It demonstrates excellent performance, mobile optimization, accessibility, and SEO practices. Analytics are implemented via Google Analytics with moderate user tracking. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS, employs standard security headers, and avoids exposing sensitive data. However, it lacks publicly available explicit security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms. Privacy compliance is strong, linking to Google's comprehensive privacy and cookie policies, with GDPR compliance evident. Overall, the website is professional, trustworthy, and well-maintained, with a high legitimacy score based on WHOIS data and domain registration consistency. The absence of direct contact information and security disclosures are minor gaps but do not significantly detract from the site's credibility.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of googlesource.com. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
73/ 100 · Medium
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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

  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

  3. 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.

    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

  4. DNS health

    DNS sends visitors and email to the right servers. Misconfigured records can cause outages or let someone redirect your traffic.

    • High

      Weak SPF Policy

      SPF record has permissive policy allowing any server to send email

      What to do: Use -all or ~all qualifier for better email security

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

Keep watching googlesource.com

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. 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
75
Security headers
60
Email security
60
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
73
Average
73

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

Google Open Source operates as an essential business entity within the technology sector, leveraging Google's extensive resources to support and release open source software. Its market positioning is strong due to Google's brand and commitment to open source. The business model focuses on community engagement, innovation facilitation, and ecosystem support rather than direct revenue generation. Target customers include open source developers, contributors, and organizations. The partnership ecosystem includes various open source projects and programs. Growth indicators include active programs like Google Summer of Code and continuous project releases. Strategic observations highlight the importance of open source in Google's product development and external community influence.

Security posture

The website exhibits a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, comprehensive security headers, and no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data. Privacy policies and cookie consent mechanisms align with GDPR requirements. However, the lack of published security policies, incident response information, and vulnerability disclosure channels indicates room for improvement in transparency and readiness. The security culture appears strong given Google's reputation, but explicit communication on these topics would enhance trust and compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and commitments.
  2. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.
  3. Provide clear incident response contact information to improve transparency and responsiveness.
  4. Enhance contact information availability for business and security inquiries to build trust.
  5. Regularly review and update privacy and cookie consent mechanisms to maintain compliance with evolving regulations.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Google Open Source
Description
Google Open Source brings the value of open source to Google and shares Google's resources with the open source community. It supports open source innovation, collaboration, and sustainability through various programs and services.
Key services
Open source project hosting and release, Open source programs like Google Summer of Code, Support for open source ecosystems and contributors
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google DevSite, Google Analytics, Google Fonts, Material Icons, Progressive Web App (manifest.json), JavaScript modules
Frameworks
DevSite framework
Platforms
Google Cloud Hosting
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of security headers
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure forms with proper input types

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (UA and GA4)
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and structured navigation.
  2. Strong use of Google branding and official domains.
  3. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on the site.
  4. Privacy and terms policies link to official Google policy pages.
  5. Use of modern web technologies and good SEO practices.
  6. No explicit security or incident response policies published on the site.
  7. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found.
  8. Social media links to official Google Open Source channels on YouTube, X, and LinkedIn.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern, scalable infrastructure using Google's DevSite framework and hosted on Google Cloud Platform, ensuring high availability and performance. The tech stack includes progressive web app features, Google Fonts, Material Icons, and Google Analytics for tracking. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, with good SEO practices implemented through meta tags and structured data. There is minimal technical debt visible, and the site benefits from continuous updates and integration with Google's developer ecosystem. Potential technical risks are low, but ongoing monitoring of third-party scripts and analytics is recommended to maintain security and privacy standards.
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. 72/100Medium30 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with googlesource.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 googlesource.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.