Skip to main content

Security report for hrc.org

Human Rights Campaign · Non-profit · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

74/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Human Rights Campaign (HRC) is a leading non-profit organization dedicated to advocating for LGBTQ+ equality and inclusion since 1980. The website serves as a hub for community engagement, education, policy advocacy, and fundraising. It targets LGBTQ+ individuals and allies, offering resources, campaigns, and calls to action such as volunteering and donations. The organization enjoys a strong market position as a prominent voice in LGBTQ+ rights advocacy in the United States. Technically, the website employs a modern technology stack including Google Tag Manager, Hotjar, Yotpo, and multiple advertising pixels, indicating a mature digital marketing and analytics infrastructure. The site is well optimized for performance, mobile responsiveness, and accessibility, with comprehensive SEO and metadata implementation. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS with good SSL configuration and implements cookie consent mechanisms aligned with GDPR compliance. However, explicit security headers are not detected, and there is no public security policy or incident response information available. The WHOIS data is privacy protected, which is common for non-profits but limits domain registration transparency. Overall, the website presents a professional, trustworthy, and secure platform for its advocacy mission. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security headers, publishing security and incident response policies, and providing clearer contact information for security and privacy inquiries to further strengthen trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
65/ 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

5 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 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 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

  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 Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

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

Keep watching hrc.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
67
Security headers
50
Email security
87
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
65
Average
74

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

HRC operates as a large non-profit entity focused on LGBTQ+ advocacy, mobilizing voters, educating the public, and advancing pro-equality policies and litigation. Its revenue streams likely include donations, merchandise sales, and corporate sponsorships. The organization has a broad partnership ecosystem with major corporations and maintains a significant social media presence. Growth indicators include active campaigns like 'One Million Voices for Equality' and a membership base exceeding 3 million. The website reflects a mature operational model with clear branding and community engagement strategies.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a solid security posture with HTTPS enforced and cookie consent aligned with GDPR. The absence of explicit security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options represents an area for improvement. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the content. The lack of published security policies or incident response contacts limits transparency and readiness perception. Overall, the security maturity is good but could be enhanced by adopting additional best practices and disclosure.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce security headers including CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to mitigate common web attacks.
  2. Publish a clear security policy and incident response plan on the website to improve transparency and trust.
  3. Provide dedicated contact information for security incidents and data protection officer inquiries.
  4. Establish a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking pixels to minimize privacy risks and ensure compliance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Human Rights Campaign
Description
Since 1980, we’ve led the way in fighting for LGBTQ+ equality and inclusion.
Key services
Mobilizing equality voters, Educating public and community about LGBTQ+ issues, Advancing pro-equality policy and litigation
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Tag Manager, Google Optimize, Hotjar, Yotpo, Xandr Universal Pixel, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Bing Ads, Snapchat Pixel
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No exposed sensitive data detected
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via GTM), Hotjar
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Xandr, Bing Ads, Facebook Ads, Snapchat Ads
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Hotjar, Yotpo, Snapchat Pixel, Bing Ads Pixel
Marketing tools
Google Optimize
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 LGBTQ+ equality advocacy and community engagement.
  3. Multiple calls to action for donations, volunteering, and story sharing.
  4. Robust social media presence across major platforms.
  5. Use of multiple tracking and marketing technologies.
  6. No security or content blocking detected.
  7. WHOIS data is unavailable, likely due to privacy protection.
  8. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on main pages.
  9. Privacy and cookie policies are present and GDPR compliant.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern and diverse set of marketing and analytics technologies, including Google Tag Manager, Hotjar, Yotpo, and multiple ad pixels from Facebook, LinkedIn, Snapchat, and Bing. The site is well optimized for mobile devices and accessibility, with responsive design and clear navigation. Performance appears fast with efficient image loading and preconnect hints. The CMS is not explicitly identified, but the presence of SEOmatic meta tags suggests a CMS or framework with SEO capabilities. Hosting provider details are not evident from the data. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a high-quality user experience and effective digital marketing.
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 hrc.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 hrc.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.