Skip to main content

Security report for jrs.net

Jesuit refugee service · Non-profit organization management · Italy

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

56/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
70/ 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

5 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

  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 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';…

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

Keep watching jrs.net

This scan found 20 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
15
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
70
Average
56

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

JRS holds a strong position in the humanitarian NGO sector, focusing on refugee support worldwide. Its business model is donation and grant-funded, supported by global advocacy and education programs. The organization targets donors, volunteers, and advocacy groups, leveraging digital channels for fundraising and awareness. Partnerships with fundraising platforms and email marketing services indicate a mature digital fundraising strategy. The website content and social media links reflect active engagement and transparency, which are critical for donor trust and regulatory compliance. The organization's medium size and international scope are consistent with the content and technical infrastructure observed.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a good security maturity level with enforced HTTPS, cookie consent management, and use of Google reCAPTCHA on forms. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected. However, the absence of explicit security headers like Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options suggests room for improvement. There is no visible security policy or incident response information, which are important for transparency and trust. The use of privacy protection in WHOIS is appropriate and does not raise concerns. Overall, the security posture is solid but could be enhanced by formalizing policies and improving header configurations.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy page and provide clear incident response contact channels.
  3. Add a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Regularly review and update third-party scripts and plugins to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance form security with server-side validation and monitoring to prevent abuse.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS)
Registration number
Italian Charity ID 97229380585
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS)
Description
The Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) seeks to accompany, serve, and advocate the cause of refugees and other forcibly displaced people.
Key services
Accompany refugees, Serve refugees, Advocate for refugee rights, Education and livelihoods programs, Mental health and psychosocial support, Advocacy
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Fundraise Up, PixelYourSite, CookieYes, AddToAny, ActiveCampaign forms, Cloudflare (implied by __cf_bm cookie)
Frameworks
Yoast SEO, PixelYourSite, Cookie Law Info plugin
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent with granular categories
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA on forms
  • No exposed sensitive data found

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, PixelYourSite, ActiveCampaign
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Ads, Facebook Ads, DoubleClick
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, PixelYourSite
Marketing tools
ActiveCampaign, AddToAny, Fundraise Up
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professionally maintained NGO site with comprehensive content
  2. Strong privacy and cookie consent mechanisms implemented
  3. Multiple external integrations for analytics, fundraising, and marketing
  4. No visible security issues or blocking detected
  5. WHOIS privacy protection used but justified for non-profit organization
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 jrs.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 jrs.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.