Skip to main content

Security report for icann.org

Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

74/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is a globally recognized non-profit organization responsible for coordinating the global Internet's unique identifiers, including domain names and IP addresses. Established in 1998, ICANN plays a critical role in ensuring a stable, secure, and unified Internet. The website reflects this mission with comprehensive content targeting Internet stakeholders, governments, registries, and the general public. ICANN maintains a strong market position as the authoritative body for domain name system management and Internet governance. Technically, the website employs modern web technologies including Angular framework and integrates privacy and cookie consent mechanisms via OneTrust. The site is well optimized for mobile devices, accessible, and SEO-friendly. Performance is moderate, with a professional design and clear navigation enhancing user experience. Security is robust, with HTTPS enforced, multiple security headers present, and ISO 27001 certification indicating mature information security management practices. The security posture is strong, with no detected vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data. ICANN provides clear security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure information, demonstrating transparency and readiness. Privacy compliance is excellent, with GDPR considerations and cookie consent mechanisms implemented. Business credibility is high, supported by clear organizational information, contact details, and trust indicators. Overall, ICANN's website is a trustworthy, professional, and secure platform that effectively supports its mission and stakeholder engagement. The domain's longstanding history and global recognition further reinforce its legitimacy. Strategic recommendations include continuous monitoring of third-party components, enhancing user education on privacy, and maintaining transparency on security matters.

Scanned

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

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 100 · Low
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

3 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. 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

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

Keep watching icann.org

This scan found 18 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
35
Email security
60
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
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

ICANN operates as a non-profit entity in the technology and government sectors, focusing on Internet governance and domain name system coordination. Its competitive advantage lies in its unique global mandate and authoritative role in Internet infrastructure. Revenue streams primarily come from domain name registries and registrars through fees. The target customer segments include governments, Internet service providers, registries, registrars, and the broader Internet community. ICANN's partnership ecosystem includes critical entities like IANA. The organization's operations are transparent, with a strong emphasis on policy development and stakeholder engagement, positioning it as a central figure in Internet governance.

Security posture

ICANN demonstrates a mature security posture with ISO 27001 certification and comprehensive security policies publicly available. The website enforces HTTPS and includes multiple security headers, reducing common web vulnerabilities. Incident response and vulnerability disclosure processes are clearly defined, with dedicated contact channels. No significant vulnerabilities or compliance gaps were detected. Data protection practices align with GDPR requirements, and cookie consent mechanisms are implemented. The organization's security culture appears strong, emphasizing transparency and stakeholder communication. Recommendations focus on maintaining up-to-date security controls and enhancing user awareness.

Recommendations

  1. Conduct regular third-party library audits to mitigate supply chain risks.
  2. Enhance transparency by publishing detailed security incident reports.
  3. Expand user education initiatives on privacy and security best practices.
  4. Maintain and update GDPR compliance documentation and cookie consent tools.
  5. Develop a long-term security strategy incorporating emerging threats and technologies.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
Description
ICANN’s mission is to help ensure a stable, secure, and unified global Internet.
Key services
Domain name system coordination, Policy development, Internet protocol address space allocation, Root server system management
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Angular (implied by _ngcontent-ng- attributes), OneTrust cookie consent, Google Fonts (Noto Sans), HTTPS
Frameworks
Angular
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent implemented
  • Security policy and incident response publicly available
  • ISO 27001 certification

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
excellent

Advertising

Tracking pixels
OneTrust
Marketing tools
OneTrust Cookie Consent
Transparency
excellent

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is comprehensive, professional, and well-structured.
  3. Strong privacy and security policies are in place.
  4. WHOIS data is unavailable due to malformed response, but domain is well known and trusted.
  5. No suspicious or malicious indicators found.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern web technologies, notably Angular, and integrates Google Fonts and OneTrust for privacy management. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, with good SEO practices evident from meta tags and structured data. Performance is moderate, suggesting opportunities for optimization. No CMS was explicitly detected, indicating a custom or proprietary platform. Hosting details are not explicitly available but the site uses HTTPS with strong SSL configuration. Technical risks are minimal, with no visible outdated or vulnerable components. Opportunities exist to enhance performance and further modernize infrastructure.
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. 74/100Medium27 findingsView report
  2. 74/100 +6Medium26 findingsView report
  3. 68/100Medium23 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with icann.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 icann.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.