Skip to main content

Security report for icfainc.org

Other · United States

Partial score · DNS & email only

68/100

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

The website icfainc.org is currently inaccessible due to an invalid SSL certificate on the origin server, resulting in a Cloudflare error 526 page being served. This prevents access to any substantive website content, including business descriptions, contact information, or policies. The domain is relatively new, registered in 2021, and uses privacy protection services, which limits transparency about the registrant. The technical infrastructure relies on Cloudflare for CDN and security services, but the lack of a valid SSL certificate on the origin server is a critical security and accessibility issue. No security headers or advanced configurations are detected, and no analytics or advertising technologies are present. Overall, the website's security posture is weak due to the SSL misconfiguration, and the lack of content and policies indicates low digital maturity.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
Checks completed
6of 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

6 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

  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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Cloudflare

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

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

Keep watching icfainc.org

This scan found 17 issues across 5 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
75
Email security
60
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
68

Not counted

  • Security headers: did not complete in this scan.
  • 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

Due to the absence of accessible website content, no meaningful business intelligence can be derived. The domain registration data shows privacy protection and a US-based registrar, but no clear business identity or sector is evident. The lack of contact details, policies, or marketing information suggests the website is either under development or abandoned. No partnerships or related domains are identified. The business model, target audience, and market position remain unknown.

Security posture

The security posture is poor, primarily due to the invalid SSL certificate causing Cloudflare to block access with error 526. No DNSSEC is enabled, and no security headers are detected. The website does not present any privacy or security policies, nor does it provide incident response contacts. These factors indicate a low level of security maturity and readiness. The use of Cloudflare provides some protection, but the origin server's misconfiguration is a critical vulnerability that must be addressed immediately.

Recommendations

  1. Install and configure a valid SSL certificate on the origin server to restore secure HTTPS access.
  2. Enable DNSSEC for the domain to enhance DNS security.
  3. Implement standard security headers such as HSTS, X-Content-Type-Options, and Content-Security-Policy.
  4. Develop and publish privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies to improve compliance and trust.
  5. Add clear contact information and business details to improve credibility and user trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Cloudflare detected. Website is serving a Cloudflare error page (Error 526) indicating invalid SSL certificate on origin server, blocking normal content access. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Stack
Cloudflare
Performance
slow
Mobile
poor
Accessibility
poor
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
10/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website is inaccessible due to invalid SSL certificate error (Cloudflare 526).
  2. No business or contact information is present on the website.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  4. No forms or data collection mechanisms detected.
  5. No analytics or advertising technologies detected.
  6. Website content is minimal and only shows an error page.
  7. Domain is privacy protected and relatively new.
  8. No security headers or advanced security configurations detected.
  9. No social media or external business links found except Cloudflare and ICANN references.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses Cloudflare as a CDN and security provider but suffers from a critical SSL misconfiguration on the origin server, resulting in error 526 and blocking all content delivery. No CMS or frameworks are detected from the HTML content. The site lacks meta tags beyond basic charset and viewport settings, and no SEO or accessibility features are present. Performance is poor due to the site being inaccessible. The domain is hosted via NameSilo, LLC with Cloudflare name servers. No analytics or tracking scripts are found. The technical debt is high, and modernization efforts should focus on fixing SSL issues and implementing basic web 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

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with icfainc.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 icfainc.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.