Skip to main content

Security report for mozilla.com

Mozilla · Technology · N/a

Low risk. No critical or high findings.

Security score

86/100

Risk levelLow

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

Mozilla operates the Firefox browser, a free and privacy-focused web browser available on desktop and mobile platforms. The website www.firefox.com serves as a portal for downloading Firefox and accessing related resources. The site is professionally designed, mobile-optimized, and provides comprehensive information about Firefox features and privacy commitments. Mozilla's non-profit status and strong branding reinforce trust and market position as a leading privacy-centric browser provider. Technically, the site uses modern web technologies, enforces HTTPS, and implements security best practices including security headers and cookie consent mechanisms. However, the absence of explicit security policies and incident response information is a minor gap. WHOIS data for the domain www.firefox.com is missing, suggesting it is an alias or redirect rather than a primary domain, but the website content and branding strongly indicate legitimacy. Overall, the site demonstrates a mature digital presence with strong privacy and security posture, suitable for a large technology organization.

Scanned

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

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 100 · Low
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

No critical or high findings. These medium findings are worth fixing next.

  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.

    • Medium

      Missing X-XSS-Protection header

      Legacy XSS protection (deprecated but still recommended)

      What to do: Add "X-XSS-Protection: 1; mode=block"

    • Medium

      Missing Permissions-Policy header

      Controls browser features and APIs

      What to do: Implement a Permissions-Policy to restrict feature access

      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Permissions-Policy: accelerometer=(), autoplay=(), camera=(), cross-origin-isolated=(),…

  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • Medium

      Privacy policy may not be GDPR compliant

      Privacy policy lacks explicit GDPR compliance elements

      What to do: Update privacy policy to explicitly address GDPR requirements and user rights

  3. 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.

    • Medium

      No DKIM record found

      DKIM adds cryptographic signatures to emails

      What to do: Configure DKIM with your email provider

    • Medium

      No MTA-STS Policy

      MTA-STS enforces TLS for email delivery

      What to do: Implement MTA-STS to prevent downgrade attacks

Keep watching mozilla.com

This scan found 13 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
75
Email security
70
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
86

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

Mozilla's Firefox browser targets general internet users who value privacy and performance. The business model is non-profit, focusing on providing free software and fostering community engagement. The website supports multiple platforms and languages, indicating a global reach. Key services include browser downloads, add-ons, support, and community resources. The company maintains a strong social media presence and transparent privacy policies. The lack of direct contact information on the site suggests reliance on support portals and community channels. The domain's WHOIS inconsistency is likely due to strategic domain management rather than malicious intent. Mozilla's market position as a privacy-first browser provider is reinforced by consistent branding and comprehensive content.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS with excellent SSL configuration and implements multiple security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security. Cookie consent mechanisms are present, supporting GDPR compliance. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. The use of Sentry for error monitoring indicates proactive security monitoring. However, the absence of a published security policy, vulnerability disclosure program, or security.txt file limits transparency and incident response readiness. No direct security contact channels were found. Overall, the security posture is strong but could be improved by publishing formal security documentation and contact points.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and compliance.
  2. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file.
  3. Provide direct security contact information such as security@mozilla.org or abuse@mozilla.org.
  4. Enhance accessibility features to improve inclusivity and compliance.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and dependencies to mitigate supply chain risks.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Mozilla
Description
Firefox is a free web browser backed by Mozilla, a non-profit dedicated to internet health and privacy. Firefox offers faster page loading, less memory usage, and is packed with features.
Key services
Firefox Browser for desktop and mobile, Add-ons and extensions, Support and community engagement
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, CSS, HTML5, Sentry (error tracking), Google Tag Manager
Platforms
Desktop (Windows, Mac, Linux), Mobile (Android, iOS)
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent banner with opt-in/out
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of Sentry for error monitoring

Analytics and tracking

Services
Sentry, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Sentry
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 privacy and cookie consent mechanisms present.
  3. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on main site.
  4. No explicit security policy or incident response info published.
  5. WHOIS data for domain is missing, indicating domain is likely an alias or redirect.
  6. Website uses modern technologies and good security headers.
  7. Content is safe and suitable for general audiences.
  8. Social media presence is strong and consistent with Mozilla branding.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern tech stack including JavaScript, CSS, and HTML5, with integration of Sentry for error tracking and Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing. The site is mobile-optimized and performs well with fast loading times. SEO is supported by comprehensive meta tags and Open Graph data. No CMS was detected, suggesting a custom or proprietary platform. Hosting provider details are not explicit. The site demonstrates good technical maturity with room for improvement in accessibility and formal 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. 82/100Low25 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with mozilla.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 mozilla.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.