Skip to main content

Security report for monumentalfoundation.org

Monumental Sports & Entertainment Foundation · Non-profit · N/a

Low risk. 5 critical or high findings in Email security and GDPR outside view.

Security score

78/100

Risk levelLow

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

Monumental Sports & Entertainment Foundation operates a website serving as the official home for the foundation. The site presents minimal content focused on branding and basic information, with no detailed descriptions of services or contact information. The technical infrastructure is based on the ViewLift CMS platform with React frontend components, and includes Google Tag Manager for analytics. The website is accessible without any WAF or security blocking mechanisms detected. However, the lack of privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies, as well as absence of contact details, limits the site's compliance and user trust. The WHOIS data is unavailable due to a malformed response, indicating privacy protection which is common for foundations but reduces transparency. Security headers and SSL configuration details are not evident from the provided data, suggesting room for improvement in security posture. Overall, the site is safe for general audiences but would benefit from enhanced compliance and transparency measures.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

  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

      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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics

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

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

Keep watching monumentalfoundation.org

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. 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
100
Security headers
95
Email security
60
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
78

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 foundation appears to be a small non-profit entity focused on sports and entertainment, targeting a general audience. The business model is likely philanthropic or community-oriented, but no explicit services or programs are detailed on the site. The lack of contact information and business details limits insight into market positioning or partnerships. The use of a professional CMS platform indicates some level of digital maturity, but content and business intelligence are minimal. No related or partner domains were identified, and no certifications or trust indicators are present.

Security posture

The website currently exhibits a basic security posture with HTTPS implied but no visible security headers or policies. The absence of privacy and cookie policies suggests potential compliance gaps with GDPR or other data protection regulations. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided. The use of Google Tag Manager introduces moderate user tracking, but no explicit data retention or privacy compliance details are available. The WHOIS privacy protection is justified but reduces transparency. Recommendations include implementing security headers, publishing privacy and cookie policies, and providing contact information for incident response.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Add clear contact information including emails and phone numbers for user support and incident response.
  3. Configure and verify security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Ensure SSL/TLS configuration is strong and enforce HTTPS site-wide.
  5. Consider adding a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to enhance security transparency.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Monumental Sports & Entertainment Foundation
Description
The official home of Monumental Sports & Entertainment Foundation.
Content quality
basic
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
React (implied by chunk.js and chunk.css naming), ViewLift platform
Platforms
ViewLift CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
30/100

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
basic
User experience
basic
Content relevance
basic
Navigation
basic
Professionalism
basic
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible with no WAF or blocking detected
  2. WHOIS data is unavailable due to malformed response, indicating privacy protection
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the homepage HTML
  4. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses found in the HTML content
  5. Website uses ViewLift CMS platform and React-based frontend
  6. Google Tag Manager is used for analytics/tracking
  7. No forms detected in the provided HTML content
  8. Content is minimal and mostly structural with no detailed business or service descriptions
  9. No security headers or SSL configuration details available from provided data
  10. No social media links or external business partner domains found
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern React-based frontend served via the ViewLift CMS platform, indicating a contemporary technology stack. Performance appears moderate with CSS and JS chunking for optimization. Mobile optimization is basic but present. SEO is supported by meta tags and Open Graph data but lacks advanced structured data like JSON-LD. No forms or interactive elements were detected in the provided HTML, limiting data collection risks. Google Tag Manager is used for analytics, introducing moderate tracking. Hosting provider details are not evident. Overall, the technical implementation is functional but could be enhanced with improved accessibility, SEO, and security configurations.
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 monumentalfoundation.org. 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 monumentalfoundation.org.

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.