Skip to main content

Security report for is4oa.org

Infrastructure Services for Open Access C.I.C. · Other · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

63/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Infrastructure Services for Open Access C.I.C. (IS4OA) is a small non-profit community interest company based in the United Kingdom, serving as the parent holding company for the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). The website primarily provides organizational information and transparent financial reporting for DOAJ, targeting the academic and open access publishing community. The business model focuses on supporting open access infrastructure through non-commercial means, positioning IS4OA as a trusted steward in the open access ecosystem. Technically, the website is built on the WordPress platform hosted on WordPress.com, utilizing Jetpack and Gutenberg technologies. It employs HTTPS for secure communication and embeds financial documents as PDFs for transparency. The site demonstrates moderate performance and good mobile optimization, with basic accessibility and SEO features. However, it lacks advanced security headers and DNSSEC, which could enhance its security posture. From a security perspective, the site benefits from HTTPS and domain registration protections but lacks published privacy, cookie, and security policies. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, which are areas for improvement. The absence of privacy and cookie policies also impacts GDPR compliance. Overall, the security posture is adequate but could be strengthened with additional policies and technical controls. The overall risk assessment is low given the non-commercial nature and transparent operations, but strategic recommendations include publishing privacy and cookie policies, enabling DNSSEC, adding security headers, and establishing vulnerability disclosure and incident response contacts to enhance trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
58/ 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

7 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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

    • 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. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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

  3. 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.

    • High

      No DMARC record found

      DMARC provides email authentication and reporting

      What to do: Add DMARC record: "v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@yourdomain.com"

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

Keep watching is4oa.org

This scan found 22 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
42
Security headers
30
Email security
65
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
58
Average
63

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 is4oa.org, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for is4oa.org right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

Monitor on Breach (opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

IS4OA operates in the niche sector of open access scholarly infrastructure, with DOAJ as its key subsidiary. The organization leverages transparency and community trust as competitive advantages, demonstrated by publicly available financial reports. Revenue streams likely include grants and donations typical for non-profits. The target customers are academic institutions, publishers, and researchers advocating open access. Growth indicators include ongoing financial disclosures and active social media engagement via Twitter. The partnership ecosystem is limited but includes WordPress.com for hosting and Twitter for outreach. Strategic observations suggest a focus on maintaining transparency and compliance to sustain credibility in the academic community.

Security posture

The current security maturity level is moderate. HTTPS is enforced, and domain registration includes protective status flags. However, the lack of DNSSEC and security headers exposes minor risks. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. Compliance gaps exist due to missing privacy and cookie policies, which are critical for GDPR adherence. Incident response readiness is unclear as no contacts or policies are published. The security culture appears basic, with room for improvement in formalizing policies and technical safeguards. Business impact of current gaps is low given the informational nature of the site but should be addressed to maintain stakeholder trust.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy to improve GDPR compliance and user trust.
  2. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  3. Implement security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to mitigate common web attacks.
  4. Create and publish a security.txt file and incident response contact information to facilitate vulnerability reporting and incident management.
  5. Regularly review and update technical infrastructure and policies to align with best practices and evolving compliance requirements.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Infrastructure Services for Open Access C.I.C.
VAT number
DK 42967831
Registration number
08307499
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Infrastructure Services for Open Access C.I.C.
Description
Parent holding company for DOAJ
Key services
Management and oversight of DOAJ, Publishing financial transparency reports
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Jetpack, Gutenberg, Twitter Widgets, PDF embedding
Frameworks
WordPress CMS
Platforms
WordPress.com hosting
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Domain status includes clientDeleteProhibited etc. to prevent unauthorized changes
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
WordPress.com Stats
Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
WordPress.com stats pixel
Marketing tools
Jetpack, Twitter widgets
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a WordPress.com hosted blog for Infrastructure Services for Open Access, parent company of DOAJ.
  2. Content focuses on financial transparency and organizational information.
  3. No privacy or cookie policies found, which is a compliance gap.
  4. Contact available only via contact page form; no direct emails or phone numbers found.
  5. No explicit security or incident response policies published.
  6. Use of embedded PDFs for financial reports is user-friendly.
  7. Social media presence limited to Twitter feed embedded.
  8. No advertising or affiliate marketing detected.
  9. Website uses HTTPS and modern WordPress technologies.
  10. No signs of malicious or suspicious content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress CMS platform hosted by WordPress.com, leveraging Jetpack and Gutenberg for enhanced functionality. The infrastructure supports embedded PDF documents and integrates social media widgets for Twitter. Performance is moderate with good mobile responsiveness. Technical debt appears low, but the absence of DNSSEC and security headers indicates opportunities for modernization. The site’s SEO and accessibility are basic but sufficient for its informational purpose. Technical risks are minimal but could impact business operations if security policies and controls are not improved.
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 is4oa.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 is4oa.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.