Skip to main content

Security report for greenpeace.fr

Greenpeace France · Non-profit · France

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

Security score

50/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Greenpeace France is a prominent international non-profit environmental organization dedicated to advocacy, public awareness, and activism on issues such as climate change, nuclear disarmament, deforestation, and ocean protection. The organization operates through a large network of supporters and local volunteer groups, funded primarily by donations. The website reflects a mature digital presence with strong branding, comprehensive content, and clear calls to action for donations and activism. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern plugins and tracking tools including Google Analytics, Matomo, and Google Tag Manager. It is well optimized for mobile devices and SEO, with fast loading times and accessibility considerations. The site employs HTTPS and cookie consent mechanisms, demonstrating good privacy compliance. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and no visible vulnerabilities, though explicit security headers and incident response information are absent. The WHOIS data is unavailable, which slightly reduces transparency but does not detract from the site's legitimacy given the organization's global reputation and consistent branding. Overall, Greenpeace France's website is a secure, professional, and trustworthy platform supporting its mission to engage the public in environmental causes.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
10/ 100 · Critical
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. GDPR outside view

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

    • Critical

      EU business without adequate privacy measures

      EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

      What to do: Implement comprehensive GDPR compliance including privacy policy, cookie consent, and data protection measures

    • 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

  2. 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';…

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

Keep watching greenpeace.fr

This scan found 23 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
72
Security headers
20
Email security
67
DNS health
90
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
10
Average
50

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

Greenpeace France holds a leading position in the environmental non-profit sector in France, leveraging a strong global brand. Its business model relies on donations, memberships, and volunteer engagement. The website supports multiple campaigns and provides extensive educational content, enhancing its outreach. Partnerships include dedicated donation and recruitment portals. The organization targets environmentally conscious individuals and activists, with a focus on transparency and community involvement. Growth indicators include active social media channels and frequent news updates. Strategic observations suggest continued investment in digital engagement and privacy compliance will support sustained influence.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, cookie consent, and no exposed sensitive data. However, the absence of explicit security headers like X-Frame-Options and a published security policy or incident response contacts indicates room for improvement. No vulnerabilities or malware were detected in the content. The use of multiple third-party analytics and advertising scripts is managed with user consent, aligning with GDPR requirements. The lack of a security.txt file or vulnerability disclosure policy is a minor gap. Overall, the security maturity is good but could be enhanced by formalizing policies and headers.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and explicitly configure security headers such as X-Frame-Options and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against clickjacking and MIME sniffing.
  2. Publish a clear security policy and provide incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
  3. Add a security.txt file to facilitate responsible vulnerability disclosure and improve security communication.
  4. Regularly audit third-party scripts and plugins to ensure they are up to date and free from known vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance documentation of data retention policies and user privacy practices to strengthen GDPR compliance.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Greenpeace France
Registration number
REP : FR232015_01WLTX
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Greenpeace France
Description
Greenpeace is an international non-profit environmental organization present worldwide with 28 national and regional offices and three ships. It has over three million supporters globally and operates independently from governments and political or economic powers.
Key services
Environmental campaigns, Public awareness and education, Petition signing, Volunteer and local group mobilization, Donations and fundraising
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Yoast SEO plugin, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Matomo, ElasticPress, Swiper.js
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of secure donation platform

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Matomo
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Ads, Bing Ads, Facebook Pixel, Pinterest, TikTok, LinkedIn, Programmatic
Tracking pixels
Matomo
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and well maintained
  2. Strong focus on environmental activism and public engagement
  3. Comprehensive cookie consent and privacy mechanisms implemented
  4. Use of multiple analytics and advertising platforms with user consent
  5. No visible security policy or incident response information
  6. WHOIS data unavailable, which reduces transparency but not necessarily legitimacy
  7. No signs of malicious or suspicious content
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a WordPress CMS platform using modern plugins such as Yoast SEO and ElasticPress for search optimization and content management. It integrates Google Tag Manager and analytics tools like Google Analytics and Matomo for user tracking and campaign performance measurement. The site uses Swiper.js for responsive sliders and has a custom theme optimized for performance and mobile responsiveness. The hosting provider is not explicitly identified but the site uses CDN services from cdn.greenpeace.fr. The site loads quickly and is well structured with semantic HTML and accessibility features. Opportunities exist to improve security headers and formalize security policies.
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 greenpeace.fr. 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 greenpeace.fr.

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.