Skip to main content

Security report for independentpublishersguild.com

Independent Publishers Guild · Media · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 2 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS.

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Independent Publishers Guild (IPG) is a UK-based membership organization dedicated to supporting the independent publishing community. The website serves as a comprehensive portal offering membership benefits, events such as the Independent Publishing Awards, a jobs board, training resources, and industry news. The IPG positions itself as the UK's largest publishing community for independent publishers, emphasizing support, diversity, and sustainability within the sector. The organization is registered in the UK with a clear company registration number and charity status, reinforcing its legitimacy and non-profit nature. Technically, the website is built on a mature ASP.NET Web Forms platform utilizing Telerik UI controls, jQuery, and modern web fonts. It integrates analytics and user behavior tracking tools such as Google Tag Manager and Hotjar, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. The site is mobile-optimized with good navigation and accessibility features, although some improvements could be made in accessibility and security headers. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS with a good SSL configuration and secure form handling practices including anti-forgery tokens. However, DNSSEC is not enabled, and security headers are absent, which are areas for improvement. Privacy compliance is well addressed with a comprehensive privacy policy, cookie consent mechanism, and GDPR adherence. No incident response or security policy pages were found, suggesting an opportunity to enhance transparency and preparedness. Overall, the IPG website presents a professional, trustworthy, and content-rich platform for its target audience. The security posture is solid but could benefit from additional hardening measures. The business credibility is high, supported by clear registration details and consistent branding. Strategic recommendations include enabling DNSSEC, adding security headers, and publishing a security policy to further strengthen trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 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

2 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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
    • 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 independentpublishersguild.com

This scan found 23 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
52
Security headers
60
Email security
70
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
73

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

The IPG operates in the media and non-profit sectors, focusing on independent publishers in the UK. Its business model revolves around membership fees, event sponsorships, training programs, and resource provision. The organization leverages a strong partnership ecosystem, including sponsors and media partners, to enhance its offerings. The website reflects a medium-sized organization with a clear market position as a leading community for independent publishers. Growth indicators include active event management, a jobs board, and continuous content updates. The IPG's digital presence is supported by social media channels and modern web technologies, facilitating engagement and outreach.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security maturity level. HTTPS is enforced, and forms include anti-forgery tokens to prevent CSRF attacks. The absence of DNSSEC and security headers like Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options represents gaps that could expose the site to certain risks. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. Privacy compliance is strong, with cookie consent and a detailed privacy policy. However, the lack of a published security policy or incident response contact limits transparency and readiness. Overall, the security posture is adequate for the organization's scope but should be enhanced to align with best practices and regulatory expectations.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options to mitigate common web vulnerabilities.
  3. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information to enhance transparency and preparedness.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party libraries and frameworks to avoid known vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance with standards and user experience for all visitors.

Contact details published on the site

Legal name
Independent Publishers Guild
Registration number
2525655
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Independent Publishers Guild
Description
Homepage for the Independent Publishers Guild. Supporting the independent publishing community.
Key services
Membership benefits, Events including Independent Publishing Awards, Jobs board, Training and Skills Hub, Resources on diversity, sustainability, Brexit, AI and copyright, Support, advice and mentoring
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
ASP.NET Web Forms, Telerik UI controls, jQuery, Modernizr, Google Fonts (Montserrat), FontAwesome, Hotjar
Frameworks
ASP.NET, AjaxControlToolkit, Telerik.Web.UI
Platforms
Windows Server (implied by ASP.NET), GoDaddy DNS (domaincontrol.com nameservers)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Cookie consent banner implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of secure forms with anti-forgery tokens

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager), Hotjar
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Hotjar
Marketing tools
Hotjar
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professional membership organization site for independent publishers in the UK.
  2. Content is rich with resources, events, and membership information.
  3. Good use of modern web technologies and tracking tools.
  4. No signs of malicious or suspicious activity.
  5. Security could be improved with additional HTTP headers and DNSSEC.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a legacy ASP.NET Web Forms platform with Telerik UI controls and jQuery, indicating a stable but somewhat dated technology stack. Integration of Google Fonts and FontAwesome enhances visual appeal. Analytics and user behavior tracking are implemented via Google Tag Manager and Hotjar, supporting data-driven decision-making. The site is mobile responsive with good SEO meta tags and Open Graph data for social sharing. Performance is moderate, with potential for optimization. The hosting provider is not explicitly identified but DNS is managed via GoDaddy. The technical infrastructure supports the business needs but could benefit from modernization and enhanced security configurations.
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 independentpublishersguild.com. 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 independentpublishersguild.com.

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.