Skip to main content

Security report for omeka.net

Digital Scholar · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Omeka.net is a specialized hosted web publishing platform designed for cultural institutions to share digital collections and create interactive online exhibits. Operated by Digital Scholar, the platform offers a SaaS model with tiered plans targeting museums, educators, and archivists. The website presents a professional and consistent brand image with clear navigation and relevant content focused on digital heritage. Technically, the site uses a modest tech stack including jQuery and Google Fonts, with custom CSS and JavaScript, and is built on the Omeka CMS platform. Mobile optimization and accessibility are adequate but could be improved. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS implied but lacking explicit security headers and formal security policies. Privacy compliance is partial with a privacy policy and terms of service present but no cookie consent mechanism or GDPR indicators. WHOIS data is unavailable or privacy protected, which slightly reduces trust but does not contradict the legitimacy of the business. Overall, the site is safe, professional, and well-targeted to its niche audience.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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

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 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. 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 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

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

Keep watching omeka.net

This scan found 24 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
62
Security headers
35
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
68

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

Omeka.net occupies a niche market in the cultural heritage technology sector, providing a hosted platform for digital collections and exhibits. Its competitive advantage lies in its focus on media-rich storytelling combined with structured metadata management. The business model is subscription-based SaaS, appealing to small to medium cultural institutions. The parent organization, Digital Scholar, lends credibility and domain expertise. The platform's ecosystem includes plugins and themes tailored for cultural content. Growth potential exists in expanding features and improving compliance and security. Partnerships appear limited but include Digital Scholar as a key related entity. The company maintains a professional online presence with clear service offerings and user engagement via newsletters.

Security posture

The security maturity of Omeka.net is moderate. The site uses HTTPS, which is mandatory, but lacks visible security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, or X-Frame-Options. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure policy is published, and no incident response contacts are provided. There is no evidence of exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries in the front-end code. Privacy compliance is partial, with a privacy policy but no cookie consent mechanism. The absence of direct contact emails or phone numbers limits transparency. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a content publishing platform but could be enhanced by implementing security headers, formalizing incident response, and improving privacy compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to improve protection against common web attacks.
  2. Add a cookie policy and consent mechanism to comply with privacy regulations and enhance user trust.
  3. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
  4. Enhance accessibility features to meet WCAG standards and improve user experience for all visitors.
  5. Consider publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy and security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting and demonstrate security commitment.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Digital Scholar
Description
Omeka.net is a hosted web publishing platform service for cultural institutions to share digital collections and create media-rich online exhibits.
Key services
Hosted Omeka web publishing, Digital collections management, Interactive digital exhibits, Multiple themes and plugins
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery 3.2.1, Google Fonts (Lora, Oswald), Custom CSS and JavaScript
Platforms
Hosted web platform
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS usage implied by URL
  • No visible exposed sensitive data

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and navigation
  2. No WAF or blocking detected
  3. WHOIS data unavailable or privacy protected
  4. Privacy and terms policies are present but cookie policy is missing
  5. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on main site
  6. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure found
  7. No analytics or tracking scripts detected beyond jQuery and fonts
  8. Content is safe and targeted at cultural institutions
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the Omeka CMS platform with a lightweight tech stack including jQuery 3.2.1 and Google Fonts. The site uses custom CSS and JavaScript for styling and interactivity. Performance is moderate with no explicit indicators of optimization or CDN usage beyond fonts and jQuery from Google CDN. Mobile optimization is good with responsive themes demonstrated. SEO is basic with meta description present but no Open Graph or structured data detected. Accessibility is basic with skip links but no ARIA landmarks or advanced features. The lack of security headers and cookie consent mechanisms indicates technical debt in security and privacy compliance. Overall, the technical implementation is solid but could benefit from modernization and enhanced security controls.
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 omeka.net. 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 omeka.net.

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.