Skip to main content

Security report for lancet.com

The Lancet Group · Healthcare · N/a

Partial score · DNS & email only

70/100

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

The Lancet website represents a leading global medical journal operated under Elsevier, providing high-quality scientific research and healthcare information. The site targets healthcare professionals, researchers, and policy makers, offering a subscription-based publishing model. Technically, the site employs modern JavaScript frameworks, performance monitoring tools like New Relic, and cookie consent management via OneTrust, reflecting a mature digital infrastructure. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforcement and privacy compliance, although explicit security policies and incident response contacts are not publicly disclosed. Overall, the site is professional, trustworthy, and well-optimized for users and search engines.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

Checks completed
6of 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. 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 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. 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
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching lancet.com

This scan found 19 issues across 5 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
47
Security headers
65
Email security
60
DNS health
80
Network security
100
Average
70

Not counted

  • GDPR outside view: did not complete in this scan.
  • 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

The Lancet holds a prominent market position in healthcare publishing, leveraging Elsevier's global reach. Its business model focuses on subscription and content licensing, targeting academic and medical audiences. The site integrates advertising and analytics tools for monetization and performance tracking. While WHOIS data is unavailable, the brand's reputation and parent company affiliation mitigate concerns. The absence of direct contact details suggests a focus on institutional rather than direct consumer engagement. Strategic partnerships with Elsevier and use of industry-standard compliance tools indicate a robust operational ecosystem.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a solid security foundation with HTTPS, security headers, and cookie consent mechanisms. However, the lack of published security policies, incident response procedures, and vulnerability disclosure channels limits transparency. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The use of third-party monitoring and analytics is well-managed but requires ongoing review to mitigate supply chain risks. Enhancing public security documentation and providing clear incident contacts would improve the security maturity and stakeholder trust.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response page to increase transparency.
  2. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program with a security.txt file.
  3. Provide clear contact information for security incidents and data protection inquiries.
  4. Review and tighten security headers such as HSTS and X-Frame-Options if not fully implemented.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and dependencies to minimize supply chain risks.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
The Lancet Group
Description
The Lancet is a leading medical journal publishing high-quality research and scientific content aimed at improving health and lives globally.
Key services
Medical research publication, Scientific articles, Healthcare insights
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, New Relic monitoring, OneTrust cookie consent, Google Fonts, DoubleClick for Publishers, JSON-LD structured data
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent banner
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security monitoring scripts

Analytics and tracking

Services
New Relic, Pingdom
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google DoubleClick
Tracking pixels
New Relic, Pingdom
Marketing tools
Adobe DTM
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and professional design.
  2. Strong privacy and cookie consent mechanisms in place.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found on homepage HTML.
  4. No WHOIS data available, possibly due to privacy protection or registrar restrictions.
  5. Use of multiple third-party analytics and advertising services.
  6. No signs of adult or questionable content.
  7. No explicit security or incident response policies published on main site.
  8. Good SEO and accessibility features detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The Lancet website uses a modern JavaScript-based front end with performance monitoring via New Relic and user consent management through OneTrust. The site loads multiple external resources including fonts, analytics, and advertising scripts, which are industry standard but require careful management. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and accessibility features. The absence of a detected CMS suggests a custom or proprietary platform. Opportunities exist to improve technical SEO and security header configurations. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a high-quality user experience aligned with enterprise publishing standards.
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 lancet.com. 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 lancet.com.

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.