Skip to main content

Security report for livability.org.uk

Shaftesbury (operating name of Livability) · Non-profit · United Kingdom

High risk. 10 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

26/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Shaftesbury, operating under the charity Livability, is a well-established UK-based non-profit organization focused on providing disability support services including care, education, and rehabilitation. The website reflects a mature digital presence with comprehensive content, clear navigation, and multiple trust indicators such as certifications and social media presence. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with a modern tech stack but suffers from slow performance and lacks a valid SSL certificate, which is a critical security concern. The absence of HTTPS impacts user trust and security posture significantly. Privacy and cookie policies are present and indicate good compliance with GDPR standards. Overall, the site demonstrates strong business credibility but requires urgent security improvements to protect user data and enhance trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 100 · Critical
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

10 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 livability.org.uk

This scan found 22 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
0
Security headers
15
Email security
50
DNS health
70
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
0
Average
26

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

The organization positions itself as a leading disability charity in the UK, targeting individuals with disabilities, their families, carers, and professionals. Its business model relies on service provision and fundraising, supported by a large, mature domain and consistent branding. The presence of multiple certifications and a broad service offering indicates a robust operational framework. The website's content and structure support engagement with various stakeholders, including donors and volunteers. Partnerships such as with livnet.org suggest a collaborative ecosystem. Growth potential is supported by active events and fundraising appeals.

Security posture

The current security posture is weak due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and lack of security headers. No explicit security or incident response policies are found on the website, and no dedicated contact channels for security incidents are provided. While no vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the content, the lack of HTTPS is a critical issue that exposes users to potential data interception. The site uses several third-party scripts and tracking pixels, which require careful management to avoid privacy risks. Overall, the security maturity is low and requires immediate remediation.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Implement essential security headers such as HSTS, Content-Security-Policy, and X-Frame-Options.
  3. Establish and publish a clear security policy and incident response plan with dedicated contact channels.
  4. Optimize website performance to reduce load times and improve user experience.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to meet higher standards and improve inclusivity.

Contact details published on the site

Legal name
Livability
Registration number
05967087
Technical notes

Notes

The website is powered by WordPress with a suite of plugins including Smart Slider 3, Mapbox GL JS, and EWWW Image Optimizer. It uses the Thrive Theme and Thrive Visual Editor for content management and layout. The site integrates multiple analytics and tracking services such as Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, and Fathom Analytics. Despite a modern tech stack, the site suffers from slow load times (over 20 seconds) and a large page size (~1.2 MB), indicating potential technical debt and optimization opportunities. Mobile optimization is good, but accessibility is basic. Hosting is provided by Easyspace Ltd, a reputable UK hosting provider. The absence of HTTPS and security headers is a significant technical risk.
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 livability.org.uk. 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 livability.org.uk.

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.