Skip to main content

Security report for linux.com

The Linux Foundation · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

67/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Linux.com is a professional and authoritative website operated by The Linux Foundation, serving as a comprehensive resource for open source professionals. It offers news, tutorials, training, certification, and event information focused on Linux and open source technologies. The site targets developers, DevOps, enterprise users, and enthusiasts, positioning itself as a leading platform in the open source ecosystem. Technically, the website is built on WordPress CMS and integrates multiple modern analytics and marketing tools such as Google Analytics, HubSpot, and Drift chat, reflecting a mature digital infrastructure. The site is mobile-optimized and employs HTTPS for secure communications. Security posture is solid with no visible vulnerabilities, though the absence of explicit security headers and privacy policies suggests room for improvement. The lack of WHOIS data limits domain registration trust analysis but the branding and content strongly indicate legitimacy. Overall, Linux.com presents a trustworthy and professional online presence with good content quality and technical implementation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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. 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 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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, Twitter, Google APIs

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

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

Keep watching linux.com

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
95
Security headers
25
Email security
55
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
67

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

Linux.com operates under The Linux Foundation, a well-known entity in the technology sector. The website's business model revolves around content provision, training, certification, and community engagement in the open source domain. It leverages partnerships within the Linux Foundation ecosystem, including training and event platforms. The site’s market positioning is strong as a go-to resource for Linux professionals. Revenue streams likely include training and certification fees, sponsorships, and advertising. The target audience is segmented into developers, enterprise users, and enthusiasts, indicating a broad reach within the technology sector. The website's consistent branding and professional content support its credibility and market influence.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a good security posture with HTTPS enforced and no exposed sensitive data. It uses reputable third-party services for analytics and marketing, which are standard in the industry. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and lack of published security policies or incident response contacts indicate areas for enhancement. No vulnerabilities or malware indicators were detected in the content. Privacy compliance is minimal, with no visible cookie consent mechanisms or privacy policy pages, which could pose compliance risks under regulations like GDPR. Incident response readiness and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are not evident, suggesting potential gaps in security governance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with user consent mechanisms to improve compliance.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and trust.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts to mitigate risks from external dependencies.
  5. Enhance accessibility features and conduct periodic security assessments to maintain a strong security posture.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
The Linux Foundation
Description
Linux.com is the go-to resource for open source professionals to learn about the latest in Linux and open source technology, careers, best practices, and industry trends. Get news, information, and tutorials to help advance your next project or career – or just to simply stay informed.
Key services
News and articles, Tutorials, Training and certification offerings, Event promotion, Community forums and Q&A
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress CMS, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, HubSpot, Drift chat, jQuery, Yoast SEO plugin, New Relic monitoring
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security and analytics scripts from reputable providers

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, New Relic, HubSpot Analytics, LinkedIn Insight, Facebook Pixel
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
Google AdSense
Tracking pixels
HubSpot, LinkedIn Insight, Facebook Pixel, New Relic
Marketing tools
HubSpot, Drift
Transparency
good

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 and no blocking detected
  2. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service pages found in HTML content
  3. Multiple external trusted analytics and marketing scripts are used
  4. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found in visible content
  5. WHOIS data is missing or unavailable, limiting domain registration trust analysis
  6. Website uses HTTPS with no visible security warnings
  7. Content is focused on Linux and open source technology news and resources
  8. Social media presence confirmed via Twitter link
  9. Site uses WordPress CMS with Yoast SEO plugin
  10. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with a modern theme and uses several plugins including Yoast SEO for search engine optimization. It integrates multiple analytics and marketing tools such as Google Analytics, HubSpot, Drift chat, and New Relic for performance monitoring. The site is mobile responsive and uses HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate. Performance is moderate with room for optimization. No major technical debt or outdated libraries were detected in the HTML content. The site lacks some advanced security headers and explicit privacy compliance features, which are recommended for modernization. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a professional and scalable online presence.
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 linux.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 linux.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.