Skip to main content

Security report for healthforanimals.org

HealthforAnimals · Healthcare · N/a

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

51/100

Risk levelMedium

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

HealthforAnimals is a global industry association representing the animal health sector, including manufacturers of veterinary pharmaceuticals, vaccines, and other animal health products. The organization acts as a representative body for companies and associations at national and regional levels, positioning itself as a key stakeholder in the animal health industry. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand image, targeting industry stakeholders and members. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with Bootstrap and FontAwesome, hosted by OVH sas, and demonstrates moderate performance and good mobile optimization. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled and domain protection statuses set, but lacks advanced DNS security (DNSSEC) and security headers. Privacy and compliance documentation such as privacy policy, cookie policy, and terms of service are not found, indicating room for improvement in regulatory compliance. Social media presence is well integrated, enhancing business credibility. Overall, the website is functional and professional but would benefit from enhanced security practices and privacy compliance to strengthen trust and regulatory adherence.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 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

8 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 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"

  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 healthforanimals.org

This scan found 25 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
30
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
35
Average
51

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 healthforanimals.org, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
6
Employees
0
Customers
6
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
0%

1 subdomain 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 healthforanimals.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

HealthforAnimals operates as an essential industry association within the healthcare sector, specifically focusing on animal health. Its business model centers on advocacy, representation, and information dissemination for manufacturers and associations globally. The domain age of over 8 years aligns with the organization's founding date, supporting legitimacy. The organization maintains a consistent brand and targets a specialized audience of industry professionals. The website's content and social media integration suggest active engagement with stakeholders. However, the absence of detailed contact information and compliance policies may limit transparency. There is no evidence of direct revenue streams or e-commerce, consistent with an association model. The hosting by OVH sas and use of WordPress indicate a standard but reliable technical infrastructure.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and domain status protections to prevent unauthorized domain transfers or deletions, which are positive security indicators. However, the lack of DNSSEC implementation exposes the domain to potential DNS spoofing risks. No security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or Strict-Transport-Security were detected, which are recommended to mitigate common web vulnerabilities. There is no visible incident response or vulnerability disclosure information, which could hinder timely security issue reporting and resolution. No forms or input fields were detected in the analyzed content, reducing immediate risk from input-based attacks, but also limiting user interaction. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be significantly improved by implementing recommended headers, DNSSEC, and publishing security policies.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing attacks.
  2. Implement essential security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve GDPR and privacy compliance.
  4. Add incident response and vulnerability disclosure information to facilitate security issue reporting.
  5. Conduct regular security audits of third-party libraries and update them to mitigate vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
HealthforAnimals
Description
HealthforAnimals represents the animal health sector: manufacturers of veterinary pharmaceuticals, vaccines and other animal health products throughout the world, as well as the associations that represent companies at national and regional levels (referred to as Members).
Key services
Industry representation, Advocacy, Information dissemination
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Bootstrap 5, FontAwesome, WordPress
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
65/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Domain status clientDeleteProhibited and clientTransferProhibited

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible with full content.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the homepage HTML.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the provided HTML snippet.
  4. Social media links to Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn are present in JSON-LD structured data.
  5. Website uses WordPress CMS with Bootstrap and FontAwesome for UI.
  6. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure page detected.
  7. No incident response or security contact information found.
  8. No visible forms detected in the provided HTML snippet.
  9. DNSSEC is not enabled, which is a minor security gap.
  10. SSL is enabled but no detailed SSL configuration data provided.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS, leveraging Bootstrap 5 for responsive design and FontAwesome for iconography. It uses jQuery as a JavaScript library and is hosted by OVH sas, a reputable hosting provider. The site demonstrates good mobile optimization and basic accessibility features. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and structured data (JSON-LD) for organization and social media profiles. Performance is moderate, likely influenced by external CDN usage for fonts and scripts. The absence of advanced security headers and DNSSEC indicates technical debt in security hardening. No analytics or tracking scripts were detected, suggesting minimal user tracking. Overall, the technical infrastructure is standard and functional but could benefit from modernization in security and privacy features.
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 healthforanimals.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 healthforanimals.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.