Skip to main content

Security report for lacnic.net

LACNIC · Telecommunications · Uruguay

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

LACNIC operates as the Regional Internet Registry for Latin America and the Caribbean, managing IP address allocation, ASN assignments, and related internet resource services. It serves a specialized audience including ISPs, network operators, researchers, and the regional internet community. The organization maintains a professional web presence with multilingual support and offers extensive resources such as training, cybersecurity incident response, and technical reports. The website demonstrates a mature digital infrastructure with modern analytics and tracking tools integrated, reflecting a moderate to high level of digital maturity. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforced and no evident vulnerabilities, though some security headers could be improved. Privacy compliance is partially met with a comprehensive privacy policy but lacks a cookie consent mechanism. Overall, the site is trustworthy and professionally maintained, supporting LACNIC's role as a critical internet governance entity in its region.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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 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';…

  2. 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

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

Keep watching lacnic.net

This scan found 21 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
15
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
68

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

LACNIC holds a strong market position as one of the five Regional Internet Registries globally, with a non-profit business model focused on internet resource management. Its key services include IP and ASN allocation, Whois database management, reverse DNS, RPKI certification, and cybersecurity incident response. The organization targets technical and policy stakeholders in Latin America and the Caribbean, providing training and research outputs to support internet development. The website's integration with social media and analytics tools indicates active engagement and data-driven decision-making. The absence of WHOIS data is typical for such entities and does not detract from its credibility. LACNIC's certifications and transparency policies further reinforce its legitimacy and operational maturity.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS with a good SSL configuration and uses reputable third-party analytics and tracking services loaded asynchronously to minimize performance impact. Security best practices include input validation on search forms and no visible exposure of sensitive data. However, the absence of certain security headers like Content-Security-Policy and a missing cookie consent mechanism represent areas for improvement. Incident response capabilities are indicated by the presence of a CSIRT page, though direct contact channels for security incidents are not explicitly listed. Overall, the security posture is solid but could be enhanced by adopting additional headers and formal vulnerability disclosure mechanisms.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a cookie consent banner to comply with privacy regulations and improve user transparency.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to strengthen defense against common web attacks.
  3. Publish a security.txt file to facilitate responsible vulnerability disclosure and improve security communication.
  4. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all visitors.
  5. Consider publishing explicit contact information for data protection officers or security incident response teams to increase trust and compliance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
LACNIC
Description
Registro de Direcciones de Internet de América Latina y Caribe; administra recursos de numeración de Internet (IPv4 IPv6) números autónomos, resolución inversa
Key services
IP address and ASN allocation, Whois database services, Reverse DNS resolution, RPKI certification, Internet Routing Registry, Training and capacity building, Cybersecurity incident response (CSIRT), Research and technical reports
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics (gtag.js), Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, LinkedIn Insight Tag, amCharts, Slick Slider
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of security and analytics scripts with async loading
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure form submission with input validation (search form)

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Hotjar, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, LinkedIn Insight
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content in Spanish and language options
  2. Strong focus on IP address registry and internet resource management for Latin America and Caribbean
  3. Multiple official social media channels linked
  4. Use of modern web technologies and analytics tools
  5. No signs of malicious or suspicious content
  6. No explicit contact emails or phone numbers found in HTML content
  7. No cookie consent banner detected, which may be a compliance gap
  8. WHOIS data unavailable, but no negative indicators found
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a combination of jQuery, amCharts, Slick Slider, and multiple analytics/tracking scripts including Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, and LinkedIn Insight Tag. The main site appears custom-built with these libraries, while the blog is powered by WordPress. Performance is moderate with asynchronous script loading and responsive design elements. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and Open Graph data. Accessibility is basic but could be improved. No hosting provider details were detected from the content. The technical stack is modern and appropriate for the organization's needs, though some technical debt may exist in legacy jQuery usage.
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. 67/100Medium30 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with lacnic.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 lacnic.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.