Skip to main content

Security report for medium.com

Medium · Media · United States

Low risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

79/100

Risk levelLow

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

Medium is a well-established online publishing platform founded in 1998, offering a space for users to read, write, and share stories and ideas. It operates primarily in the media industry, targeting a general audience with a business model based on content hosting, membership subscriptions, and advertising. The platform enjoys a strong market position as a leading content platform with consistent branding and excellent content quality. Technically, Medium employs a modern tech stack including React, Google reCAPTCHA Enterprise, Branch.io, and multiple payment gateways such as Braintree, PayPal, and Stripe. The site is hosted with Cloudflare DNS and CDN services, ensuring fast performance and mobile optimization. Security posture is strong with HTTPS, security headers, and bot protection, although DNSSEC is not enabled and no explicit security policy or incident response contacts are published. Privacy compliance is robust with comprehensive policies and cookie consent mechanisms. Overall, Medium demonstrates high professionalism, trustworthiness, and technical maturity.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of medium.com. View the latest report

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

4 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. 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 medium.com

This scan found 15 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
75
Security headers
70
Email security
80
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
58
Average
79

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

Medium's market positioning as a leading content platform is supported by its long domain history and extensive service offerings including publishing, membership, and advertising. The company leverages partnerships with major payment processors and marketing platforms to enhance user experience and monetization. Its target customers include writers, readers, and content consumers globally. The platform's growth is indicated by its large size and extensive topic coverage. Strategic partnerships with services like Branch.io and Speechify enhance its ecosystem. Medium's business model is diversified across subscription and advertising revenue streams, positioning it well in the competitive digital media landscape.

Security posture

Medium exhibits a mature security posture with mandatory HTTPS, use of Google reCAPTCHA Enterprise to mitigate bots, and Cloudflare DNS/CDN for enhanced security and performance. The site avoids exposing sensitive data and integrates secure payment gateways. However, the absence of DNSSEC and a publicly available security policy or incident response contacts represents areas for improvement. No vulnerabilities or security incidents are evident from the analysis. Privacy policies are comprehensive and GDPR compliant, supporting strong data protection practices. Overall, Medium maintains a secure environment appropriate for its scale and industry.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC to strengthen DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and trust.
  3. Implement and publish a security.txt file to facilitate responsible vulnerability disclosure.
  4. Consider adding more explicit contact information such as phone numbers or physical addresses for customer support.
  5. Regularly review and update third-party libraries and dependencies to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Medium
Description
On Medium, anyone can share insightful perspectives, useful knowledge, and life wisdom with the world.
Key services
Online publishing, Content hosting, Membership subscription, Advertising
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google reCAPTCHA Enterprise, Branch.io, Braintree payment gateway, PayPal SDK, Stripe, Cloudflare DNS and CDN, Google Analytics, Datadog RUM
Frameworks
React
Platforms
Web
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of HTTPS
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA Enterprise for bot protection
  • Use of Cloudflare for DNS and CDN
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure payment integrations (Braintree, PayPal, Stripe)

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Datadog RUM
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Ads
Tracking pixels
Datadog RUM
Marketing tools
Branch.io
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 no blocking or WAF challenge.
  2. Comprehensive privacy and terms policies are present and linked.
  3. Use of modern web technologies and security best practices.
  4. No contact phone numbers or physical addresses found; only email contact for press inquiries.
  5. No explicit security policy or incident response information published.
  6. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found.
  7. Strong branding and consistent design.
  8. Use of multiple reputable payment gateways and analytics tools.
  9. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
Technical notes

Notes

Medium's technical infrastructure is robust, leveraging a modern React-based frontend with asynchronous JavaScript loading for performance. The use of Cloudflare DNS and CDN ensures fast content delivery and resilience. Integration with multiple payment gateways (Braintree, PayPal, Stripe) supports diverse monetization options. Google Analytics and Datadog provide comprehensive monitoring and analytics capabilities. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and accessibility considerations. No major technical debt or outdated technologies were detected. Opportunities exist to enhance DNS security and formalize security documentation.
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. 64/100 −15Medium20 findingsView report
  2. 79/100 +1Low21 findingsView report
  3. 78/100Low19 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with medium.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 medium.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.