Skip to main content

Security report for icmp.int

International Commission on Missing Persons · Government · Netherlands

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

52/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The International Commission on Missing Persons (ICMP) is a globally recognized non-profit organization dedicated to addressing the issue of missing persons resulting from conflicts, disasters, and other causes. The organization collaborates with governments, civil society, and international bodies to provide expertise, data systems, and forensic services. Their website reflects a mature digital presence with comprehensive content, multilingual support, and clear navigation tailored to a diverse audience including families of missing persons and governmental agencies. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern plugins and Cloudflare CDN protection, but it suffers from a critical lack of a valid SSL certificate and proper TLS configuration, which significantly impacts its security posture. Privacy compliance is well addressed with GDPR-aligned cookie and privacy policies. Overall, the site demonstrates high professionalism and trustworthiness but requires urgent improvements in SSL/TLS security to protect user data and maintain credibility.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
15/ 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

6 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

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

    • 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 Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  3. 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 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 icmp.int

This scan found 15 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
0
Security headers
60
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
15
Average
52

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

ICMP operates in the government and non-profit sectors, focusing on humanitarian and justice-related services. Its market position is strong as a leader in missing persons identification and related programs worldwide. The business model revolves around international cooperation, program implementation, and data coordination. The organization maintains a broad partnership ecosystem, including an Online Inquiry Center subdomain for reporting and inquiries. The website's content and structure support its mission effectively, targeting governments, justice institutions, and affected families. Growth indicators include active program pages, recent news, and multimedia content. The presence of multiple social media channels and detailed resource downloads further enhance its outreach and engagement.

Security posture

The website's security maturity is moderate due to the presence of Cloudflare protection and several security headers. However, the absence of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols represent critical vulnerabilities that expose users to risks such as data interception and man-in-the-middle attacks. The site lacks advanced SSL features like OCSP stapling and session resumption, which could improve performance and security. No evidence of exposed sensitive data or known vulnerabilities was found in the content. Privacy policies and cookie consent mechanisms are properly implemented, indicating good compliance culture. Incident response and security policy pages are not found, which could be improved to enhance transparency and readiness.

Recommendations

  1. Install and maintain a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS and secure user connections.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3) and disable deprecated versions to strengthen encryption.
  3. Implement OCSP stapling and session resumption to improve SSL performance and security.
  4. Publish explicit security policy and incident response information to increase transparency and trust.
  5. Regularly audit and update security headers and configurations to align with best practices.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern WordPress CMS with Elementor page builder and Astra theme, supported by various plugins for multilingual support (WPML), GDPR compliance (Complianz), and enhanced UI (QI Addons). Hosting is behind Cloudflare CDN providing DDoS protection and caching. Performance metrics indicate slow loading, likely due to large media and complex page structure. The site is mobile optimized with good accessibility and SEO practices. Technical debt is minimal but the invalid SSL configuration is a major risk. Opportunities exist to optimize performance and enhance security configurations to reduce risk and improve user experience.
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 icmp.int. 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 icmp.int.

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.