Skip to main content

Security report for livingwage.org.uk

Living Wage Foundation · Non-profit · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

64/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Living Wage Foundation is a UK-based non-profit organization dedicated to promoting fair wages through the real Living Wage accreditation. It operates under Citizens UK and has a strong market presence with over 16,000 accredited employers including major corporations. The website is professionally designed using Drupal 10 and Bootstrap, featuring good mobile optimization and accessibility. Security posture is strong with HTTPS and cookie consent mechanisms, though some security headers and policies could be improved. WHOIS data is unavailable due to domain naming rules error, but the website's legitimacy is supported by its content and affiliations. Overall, the site demonstrates a mature digital presence with a focus on social responsibility and employer engagement.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
58/ 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

6 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 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 Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  3. 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 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 livingwage.org.uk

This scan found 25 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
75
Security headers
35
Email security
65
DNS health
50
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
58
Average
64

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 targets employers and employees interested in fair pay and decent work standards. Its business model centers on accreditation and advocacy, supported by partnerships with well-known UK companies. The foundation leverages research, resources, and campaigns to influence wage standards. The website reflects a medium-sized non-profit with consistent branding and trust signals such as charity registration and partner logos. The presence of a dedicated shop domain indicates diversified revenue streams. The organization is well-positioned in the UK social responsibility sector with a clear mission and engaged audience.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS with anonymized IP tracking in analytics and a cookie consent banner, indicating good privacy practices. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected. However, the absence of explicit security headers and a public security policy or incident response information suggests room for improvement. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file was found. Overall, the security maturity is good but could be enhanced by formalizing security policies and improving header configurations.

Recommendations

  1. Implement standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Publish a clear security policy and incident response plan accessible on the website to improve transparency and preparedness.
  3. Add a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and libraries to mitigate risks from outdated components.
  5. Enhance monitoring and logging capabilities to detect and respond to potential security incidents promptly.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Living Wage Foundation
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Living Wage Foundation
Description
The Living Wage Foundation is a movement ensuring everyone earns a wage to meet their needs. It promotes the real Living Wage, which is independently calculated based on living costs in the UK and London. The foundation accredits employers who pay the Living Wage and advocates for fair pay, secure hours, and dignified work.
Key services
Living Wage accreditation, Living Hours accreditation, Living Pension accreditation, Employer toolkits, Research and resources, Campaigns and events
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Drupal 10, Bootstrap 3.4.5, jQuery, Slick Carousel, Google Analytics, ActOn Beacon, UserWay Accessibility Widget
Frameworks
Drupal, Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled with anonymized IP tracking in Google Analytics
  • Cookie consent banner with opt-in mechanism
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security-focused third-party scripts

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Google Tag Manager, ActOn Beacon
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
LinkedIn Insight Tag, ActOn Beacon
Marketing tools
ActOn Beacon
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 no blocking detected.
  2. Strong branding and consistent messaging about Living Wage advocacy.
  3. Comprehensive cookie consent mechanism implemented.
  4. No visible security policy or incident response information.
  5. WHOIS data unavailable due to domain naming rules error; domain likely legitimate but WHOIS query was for a subdomain.
  6. Multiple trusted partners and sponsors displayed.
  7. Use of modern web technologies and accessibility tools.
  8. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern Drupal 10 CMS with Bootstrap 3.4.5 for responsive design and jQuery for interactivity. It uses several third-party libraries including Slick Carousel and UserWay accessibility widget, indicating a focus on user experience and inclusivity. Google Analytics and LinkedIn Insight Tag are used for analytics and marketing. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and accessibility features. The site could benefit from performance tuning and enhanced security header implementation. Hosting provider details are not explicitly available from the content.
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. 63/100Medium34 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with livingwage.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 livingwage.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.