Skip to main content

Security report for nationalgeographic.com

National Geographic Partners, LLC · Media · United States

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

69/100

Risk levelMedium

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

National Geographic Partners, LLC operates the National Geographic website, a globally recognized media organization specializing in science, exploration, geography, and environmental journalism. The website serves a broad audience interested in educational and documentary content, supported by flagship publications and television programming. Owned by The Walt Disney Company, it maintains a strong market position with consistent branding and high-quality content. Technically, the website employs modern web technologies including React and integrates advanced monitoring and consent management tools such as New Relic and OneTrust. Security posture is robust with HTTPS enforcement, security headers, and no detected vulnerabilities, although explicit vulnerability disclosure and incident response contacts are not publicly available. Privacy compliance is well addressed with clear privacy and cookie policies and GDPR adherence. Overall, the site demonstrates a mature digital presence with excellent content quality and user experience, suitable for a large enterprise media entity.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 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

5 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 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';…

  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.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1
    • High

      SSL Certificate Expires Soon

      SSL certificate expires in 14 days

      What to do: Renew SSL certificate before expiration

      • NIS2 21(2)(h)
      • IR 2024/2690 9.2(c): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 9.2(c): Cryptography
      • NIST SC-17: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-17: Public Key Infrastructure Certificates

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

Keep watching nationalgeographic.com

This scan found 22 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
57
Security headers
15
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
Average
69

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

National Geographic holds a leading position in the media sector focused on science and exploration content. Its business model revolves around multi-channel content delivery including print, digital, and television. The affiliation with The Walt Disney Company provides strategic advantages and resource backing. The target audience is broad, encompassing general public and enthusiasts of geography, nature, and science. The company benefits from strong trust indicators such as industry awards and verified social media presence. Growth potential is supported by diversified content offerings and digital engagement. Partnerships and external domains reflect integration with Disney and reputable third-party services.

Security posture

The website exhibits a strong security posture with enforced HTTPS, comprehensive security headers, and no visible exposure of sensitive data. Use of reputable monitoring and consent management tools enhances security and privacy compliance. However, the absence of a public vulnerability disclosure policy and incident response contact details represents a gap in transparency and readiness communication. No critical vulnerabilities or malware indicators were detected. The site follows best practices in securing user data and consent, aligning with GDPR requirements. Recommendations include publishing explicit security policies and enhancing incident response visibility.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a formal vulnerability disclosure and bug bounty policy to encourage responsible reporting.
  2. Provide clear incident response contact information to improve transparency and trust.
  3. Disclose security certifications or compliance frameworks to strengthen security credibility.
  4. Include data protection officer contact details to comply with privacy regulations and enhance user trust.
  5. Regularly review and audit third-party scripts and integrations to mitigate supply chain risks.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
National Geographic Partners, LLC
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
National Geographic Partners, LLC
Description
National Geographic is a global media organization known for award-winning journalism in science, history, travel, photography, and environmental reporting.
Key services
National Geographic Magazine, Nat Geo TV, Digital content and storytelling
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
React, JavaScript, New Relic monitoring, OneTrust cookie consent
Frameworks
React
Platforms
Web
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of security headers
  • No exposed sensitive data detected
  • Secure forms with consent mechanisms

Analytics and tracking

Services
New Relic
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
ESPN (dcf.espn.com)
Tracking pixels
New Relic, OneTrust
Marketing tools
OneTrust cookie consent
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 advanced technical implementation.
  2. Strong branding and consistent use of National Geographic identity.
  3. Comprehensive privacy and cookie consent mechanisms in place.
  4. No signs of adult or inappropriate content.
  5. Use of reputable third-party services for analytics and consent management.
  6. WHOIS data unavailable, which is unusual but not uncommon for large brands using privacy or registry restrictions.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern React framework with extensive use of JavaScript and asynchronous loading for performance optimization. Integration with New Relic provides real-time monitoring and performance analytics. Cookie consent is managed via OneTrust, ensuring compliance with privacy laws. The site demonstrates fast loading times, excellent mobile responsiveness, and good accessibility features. No CMS was explicitly detected, suggesting a custom or proprietary content management solution. Hosting details are not explicitly available but likely leverage enterprise-grade infrastructure. Technical risks are minimal, with opportunities to enhance transparency around security policies and incident management.
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. 57/100Medium25 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with nationalgeographic.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 nationalgeographic.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.