Skip to main content

Security report for openpgp.org

OpenPGP · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

75/100

Risk levelMedium

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

OpenPGP.org is the official website for the OpenPGP standard, the most widely used email encryption protocol. The site provides information about the standard, its history, and software implementations across all major operating systems. It positions itself as a trusted, community-driven resource with a long-standing presence in the encryption technology space since 1997. The website is professionally designed with clear navigation and good mobile optimization, reflecting a mature digital presence. However, it lacks explicit privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies, which are important for compliance and user trust. Technically, the site uses modern web technologies including HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, and the Jekyll static site generator with the Minimal Mistakes theme. It employs HTTPS for secure communication but does not implement advanced security headers or disclose security policies. No tracking or advertising technologies are detected, indicating a privacy-respecting approach. The absence of WHOIS data transparency limits the ability to fully verify domain legitimacy, though the open source presence on GitHub and RFC standard references support authenticity. From a security perspective, the site demonstrates good baseline practices such as HTTPS and no exposed sensitive data. However, it lacks published security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms, which are recommended for improving security posture and user confidence. Overall, the website is safe, professional, and trustworthy but could benefit from enhanced transparency and compliance documentation. Strategically, the site should prioritize publishing privacy and cookie policies, adding security headers, and providing clear contact information for security incidents. These steps will strengthen compliance with regulations like GDPR and improve overall trustworthiness in the security community.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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

4 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.

    • 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

  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 SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching openpgp.org

This scan found 17 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
75
Security headers
85
Email security
70
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
75

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

OpenPGP.org operates as a non-commercial, community-driven project focused on maintaining and promoting the OpenPGP encryption standard. Its market position is strong within the cryptography and privacy sectors due to its long history and widespread adoption. The business model centers on providing open standards and software recommendations rather than direct commercial services. Target customers include privacy-conscious individuals, developers, and organizations requiring secure email and messaging solutions. The project benefits from an active open source ecosystem and partnerships with software vendors implementing the standard. Growth is organic, driven by increasing demand for secure communications. The lack of direct revenue streams suggests reliance on community support and volunteer contributions. The website’s clean design and GitHub presence indicate a transparent and collaborative operational style.

Security posture

The security posture of OpenPGP.org is moderate to good. The site enforces HTTPS, ensuring encrypted data transmission. No security headers are detected, which is a gap that could expose users to certain web-based attacks. There is no evidence of exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries. However, the absence of a published security policy, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure program limits the site's preparedness for handling security incidents and reduces transparency. Compliance with privacy regulations is weak due to missing privacy and cookie policies. Overall, the site is secure in its basic infrastructure but should enhance its security governance and compliance documentation to meet best practices and regulatory expectations.

Recommendations

  1. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve GDPR compliance and user trust.
  2. Implement standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Add a security policy page and provide clear incident response contact information (e.g., security@openpgp.org).
  4. Create and publish a vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
  5. Enhance WHOIS transparency by ensuring domain registration data is publicly available and consistent with website ownership.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
OpenPGP
Description
OpenPGP is the most widely used email encryption standard. It is defined by the OpenPGP Working Group of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) as a Proposed Standard in RFC 9580. OpenPGP was originally derived from the PGP software, created by Phil Zimmermann.
Key services
Email encryption standard, Software recommendations for encryption, Community and consulting
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, FontAwesome
Frameworks
Jekyll, Minimal Mistakes Jekyll Theme
Platforms
Windows, Mac OS, GNU/Linux, Android, iOS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No vulnerable libraries detected

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

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 no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the site.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly provided.
  4. Site uses HTTPS and modern web standards.
  5. Content is focused on OpenPGP encryption standard and related software.
  6. No advertising or tracking technologies detected.
  7. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information present.
  8. WHOIS data is unavailable or blocked, limiting domain trust verification.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using the Jekyll static site generator with the Minimal Mistakes theme, leveraging modern HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript technologies. It uses FontAwesome for iconography and is optimized for mobile devices with responsive design. The site loads moderately fast and has good SEO metadata including Open Graph tags and JSON-LD structured data for improved search engine understanding. No CMS other than Jekyll is detected, indicating a static site architecture which reduces attack surface. Hosting provider details are not disclosed. The site lacks advanced security headers and analytics or tracking scripts, reflecting a privacy-focused approach but missing opportunities for performance and security enhancements. Overall, the technical implementation is solid but could benefit from additional security hardening and compliance features.
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 openpgp.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 openpgp.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.