Skip to main content

Security report for iwmf.org

International Women’s Media Foundation · Media · United States

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

58/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The International Women’s Media Foundation (IWMF) is a Washington-based non-profit organization dedicated to empowering female journalists worldwide. The website clearly communicates its mission to strengthen the role of women in media through training, advocacy, and support services. The organization targets female journalists and media professionals globally, positioning itself as a leader in media advocacy for gender equality. The site is professionally designed, mobile-optimized, and uses modern web technologies including WordPress, Google Analytics, and GiveCloud for donations. Security posture is good with HTTPS enforced, though some security headers are missing which could be improved. Privacy compliance is limited as no explicit privacy or cookie policies were found in the analyzed content. WHOIS data is unavailable, which slightly reduces trust but the overall professional presentation and content quality indicate legitimacy. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security headers, publishing clear privacy and cookie policies, and improving WHOIS transparency.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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

6 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

  2. 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 Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1
    • 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';…

  3. 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

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

Keep watching iwmf.org

This scan found 24 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
72
Security headers
30
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
53
Average
58

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

IWMF operates as a non-profit in the media sector, focusing on advocacy and training for female journalists. Its business model relies on donations and grants, supported by an online presence that includes donation widgets and social media engagement. The organization has a medium size footprint with a clear mission and consistent branding. The website content is rich and relevant, targeting a niche audience of media professionals and advocates for press freedom and gender equality. The use of Google Analytics and Tag Manager indicates a moderate level of digital maturity. The absence of WHOIS data limits external verification but does not detract significantly from the organization's credibility given its established reputation in the sector.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS, which is a critical security baseline. However, it lacks several important security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options, which are recommended to mitigate common web vulnerabilities like clickjacking and MIME sniffing. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the provided content. The use of asynchronous loading for analytics and donation scripts is a good practice to reduce performance impact. The absence of a published security policy or incident response contact limits transparency in security governance. Overall, the security posture is good but could be strengthened by implementing recommended headers and publishing security-related policies.

Recommendations

  1. Implement Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, and Referrer-Policy headers to enhance security.
  2. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve privacy compliance and user trust.
  3. Provide clear contact information including emails and phone numbers for general and security-related inquiries.
  4. Improve WHOIS transparency or provide domain registration details publicly to enhance legitimacy.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and plugins to ensure no vulnerabilities are introduced.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
International Women’s Media Foundation
Description
The International Women’s Media Foundation is a Washington-based organization that is dedicated to strengthening the role of female journalists worldwide.
Key services
Journalist training and fellowships, Advocacy for women in media, Research and reports on media safety and gender issues
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, GiveCloud (donation widget), Formidable Forms plugin
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No visible exposed sensitive data
  • Use of asynchronous loading for analytics and donation scripts

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is rich, professionally presented, and targeted at media professionals and advocates.
  3. No privacy or cookie policies explicitly found in the provided HTML content.
  4. No explicit contact emails or phone numbers found in the analyzed content.
  5. Use of modern web technologies and analytics tools is evident.
  6. Security headers could be improved for better protection.
  7. WHOIS data is missing or inaccessible, limiting domain trust analysis.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress, leveraging plugins such as Formidable Forms and GiveCloud for forms and donations respectively. It uses Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager for tracking and analytics. The site loads CSS asynchronously for performance optimization and is mobile responsive with good accessibility features. The performance is moderate, with room for improvement in loading speed and security header implementation. The technical infrastructure is modern and suitable for a non-profit organization with a global audience. Hosting provider details are not evident from the content. Overall, the technical implementation supports the organization's mission effectively but could benefit from enhanced security and privacy features.
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 iwmf.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 iwmf.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.