Skip to main content

Security report for mycouncillor.org.uk

Liberal Democrats · Government · United Kingdom

High risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

41/100

Risk levelHigh

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

MyCouncillor.org.uk is a WordPress-based network of local campaigning websites affiliated with the Liberal Democrats political party in the United Kingdom. It serves as a platform to support local political campaigners and disseminate information related to Liberal Democrat activities. The website is modest in design and content, targeting a niche audience of political activists and supporters. The business model is non-profit and focused on political campaigning within the UK government sector. The site is published and promoted by a named individual on behalf of the Liberal Democrats, lending credibility and trust to the platform. Technically, the website employs a standard WordPress CMS with common plugins such as Contact Form 7 and uses Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics for tracking. The site loads resources over HTTPS and uses Typekit fonts for styling. While the technical stack is modern and functional, the site shows basic mobile optimization and accessibility features. SEO practices are minimal but present, with proper meta tags and structured CSS. From a security perspective, the website does not exhibit advanced security headers or explicit security policies. There is no visible incident response or vulnerability disclosure information, and cookie usage is declared but lacks a consent mechanism. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. The domain registration details align well with the website's political affiliation and geographic location, supporting legitimacy. Overall, the website is functional and credible for its purpose but would benefit from enhanced security practices, improved privacy compliance (notably cookie consent), and richer content and navigation improvements to better serve its audience and strengthen trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
28/ 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

8 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 mycouncillor.org.uk

This scan found 26 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
0
Security headers
15
Email security
40
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
28
Average
41

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 website operates as a specialized political campaigning network under the Liberal Democrats umbrella, focusing on local government and grassroots political engagement. Its competitive advantage lies in its affiliation with a major UK political party and its role as a centralized platform for local campaign websites. The business model is non-commercial and relies on party support and volunteer contributions. Revenue streams are not evident, consistent with a non-profit political entity. The target customer segment includes local political activists, party members, and supporters. Growth indicators are limited due to the niche focus. Partnerships include the official Liberal Democrats website and a printing service (Via Studios). Strategic observations suggest opportunities to expand digital engagement and improve compliance to enhance supporter trust and participation.

Security posture

The security maturity of the website is basic. HTTPS is used, but no advanced security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, or X-Frame-Options are detected. There is no published security policy or incident response plan, and no dedicated security contact channels are visible. The use of common WordPress plugins introduces potential risk if not regularly updated, though no vulnerable libraries were identified in the HTML. Cookie usage is disclosed but lacks a consent mechanism, which may pose GDPR compliance risks. Overall, the site is low risk but would benefit from implementing security best practices, formalizing policies, and enhancing privacy controls to reduce potential attack surface and improve compliance posture.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTP security headers including Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to harden the site against common web attacks.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner or mechanism to comply with GDPR and improve user privacy transparency.
  3. Publish a clear security policy and incident response plan accessible to users and stakeholders.
  4. Enhance mobile responsiveness and accessibility to improve user experience and inclusivity.
  5. Establish a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Liberal Democrats
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Liberal Democrats
Description
ALDC's network of local campaigning websites supporting Liberal Democrats activities and campaigns.
Key services
Local campaigning website hosting, Political information dissemination
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
WordPress, jQuery, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Contact Form 7, Typekit Fonts
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
60/100
Good practices seen
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of HTTPS implied by resource URLs

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a WordPress-based political campaigning network for the Liberal Democrats.
  2. Content is basic but relevant to target audience.
  3. No explicit cookie consent mechanism despite cookie usage.
  4. No visible security headers or advanced security policies.
  5. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly listed on homepage; contact form plugin present.
  6. Privacy policy linked externally to official party site.
  7. No terms of service or vulnerability disclosure policies found.
  8. Google Analytics and Tag Manager used for tracking.
  9. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with standard plugins such as Contact Form 7 and uses jQuery and Typekit fonts for frontend functionality and styling. Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics are integrated for user tracking and analytics. The site loads CSS and JS resources from its own domain and trusted third-party domains. Performance is moderate with no explicit optimization techniques detected. The HTML structure is valid and includes meta viewport tags for responsive design. However, accessibility features are basic and could be improved. No advanced frameworks or custom backend technologies are evident. Hosting provider details are not disclosed in the HTML content. Overall, the technical infrastructure is typical for a small political campaign website but has room for modernization and security enhancements.
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 mycouncillor.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 mycouncillor.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.