Skip to main content

Security report for internic.net

Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers · Technology · N/a

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view.

Security score

76/100

Risk levelLow

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

The InterNIC website serves as a public informational resource regarding Internet domain name registration services. It is licensed by the U.S. Department of Commerce and operated by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), positioning it as an authoritative source in the domain registration ecosystem. The site provides links to registrar directories, Whois lookup tools, and complaint resolution resources, targeting domain registrants and the general public seeking domain-related information. Technically, the website is simple and functional, employing basic HTML and CSS with responsive meta tags for mobile optimization. There is no evidence of advanced frameworks or CMS usage. The site lacks modern security headers and explicit HTTPS confirmation in the provided data, indicating room for improvement in security posture. No forms or data collection mechanisms are present, minimizing privacy risks but also limiting interactive functionality. From a security perspective, the absence of WHOIS registration data for the domain www.internic.net is notable; the WHOIS query returned no match, suggesting the domain may be unregistered or reserved. Despite this, the website content and links to official ICANN resources strongly support its legitimacy. The site does not provide privacy or cookie policies, nor contact information for incident response, which are areas for enhancement to meet modern compliance standards. Overall, the website is trustworthy and authoritative in content but could benefit from improved technical security measures, privacy disclosures, and contact transparency to enhance user trust and compliance.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of internic.net. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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

3 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.

    • 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

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

Keep watching internic.net

This scan found 17 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
100
Security headers
60
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
76

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention internic.net, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
10
Employees
0
Customers
10
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
30%

3 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for internic.net.

Select it in the checkout above.

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

InterNIC operates as an essential entity within the Internet governance and domain registration sector, providing authoritative information and resources related to domain name registration and compliance. Its market position is strong due to its licensing by the U.S. Department of Commerce and operation by ICANN, a globally recognized authority. The business model focuses on information dissemination rather than commercial transactions, serving registrants, registrars, and the broader Internet community. The absence of direct contact details or commercial services suggests a focus on regulatory and informational roles rather than customer service or sales. The partnership ecosystem includes ICANN and IANA, reinforcing its central role in Internet infrastructure. Growth indicators are not applicable given the informational nature of the site.

Security posture

The current security posture of the InterNIC website is basic. The lack of visible HTTPS confirmation and security headers indicates potential vulnerabilities to common web threats such as man-in-the-middle attacks or clickjacking. No forms or user input fields reduce the attack surface, but the absence of privacy and cookie policies suggests compliance gaps with GDPR and other data protection regulations. Incident response mechanisms and security contact channels are not provided, limiting transparency and readiness for security events. The WHOIS data inconsistency raises questions but is mitigated by the authoritative nature of the content and its association with ICANN. Overall, the site demonstrates a low to moderate security maturity level with significant opportunities for improvement.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate and enforce secure connections site-wide.
  2. Add standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Publish clear and comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  4. Provide visible contact information for security incidents and general inquiries to enhance transparency and trust.
  5. Improve mobile responsiveness and accessibility features to enhance user experience across devices.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
Description
InterNIC provides public information regarding Internet domain name registration services. It is a registered service mark of the U.S. Department of Commerce and licensed to ICANN, which operates the website.
Key services
Domain name registration information, Registrar accreditation directory, Whois lookup services, Complaint and dispute resolution guidance
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS, Responsive meta viewport
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
50/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is informational and official in nature
  2. No forms or data collection fields present
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies explicitly linked
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers found on the page
  5. No social media links detected
  6. No scripts or external JavaScript libraries detected in HTML
  7. Minimal technical complexity and modern features
  8. No security headers or HTTPS information available from provided data
  9. WHOIS data unavailable for domain, indicating domain may be unregistered or reserved
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses basic HTML and CSS with responsive meta tags but lacks modern JavaScript frameworks or CMS platforms. There are no detected external scripts or analytics services, indicating minimal tracking and a simple technical footprint. The site performance is likely moderate given the minimal content and resources. However, the absence of security headers and HTTPS confirmation suggests technical debt in security implementation. The site could benefit from modernization efforts including adoption of security best practices, improved accessibility, and enhanced SEO metadata.
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. 77/100Low25 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with internic.net. 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 internic.net.

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.