Skip to main content

Security report for oxfam.org.au

Oxfam Australia · Non-profit · Australia

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

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Oxfam Australia is a well-established non-profit organization dedicated to fighting inequality and ending poverty through humanitarian aid, advocacy, and long-term development projects. The website reflects a mature digital presence with comprehensive content, clear calls to action, and strong branding consistency. The organization targets a broad audience including donors, volunteers, and affected communities, positioning itself as a trusted leader in the non-profit sector in Australia. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with modern frameworks like Bootstrap and uses several analytics and optimization tools such as Google Tag Manager, Hotjar, and Visual Website Optimizer. The site is mobile-optimized, accessible, and SEO-friendly, indicating a good level of digital maturity. From a security perspective, the site employs HTTPS with strong SSL configuration and appropriate security headers. However, it lacks publicly visible security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms, which are recommended for enhanced transparency and trust. Overall, the website is professional, secure, and compliant with privacy regulations, with minor areas for improvement in security policy visibility and incident response readiness. The domain registration data is limited due to privacy policies but aligns with the organization's legitimacy and operational history.

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

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 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 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

      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 oxfam.org.au

This scan found 21 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
52
Security headers
95
Email security
70
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
73

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

Oxfam Australia operates as a large non-profit entity focused on poverty alleviation and social justice. Its business model relies on donations, philanthropy, and volunteer engagement. The organization has a strong market position supported by government partnerships and a broad network of local and international collaborators. The website's content and linked domains reveal a robust ecosystem of campaigns, fundraising platforms, and partner services. Growth indicators include active appeals, advocacy campaigns, and community stories that engage donors and volunteers. The organization maintains a consistent brand and professional online presence, reinforcing its credibility and trustworthiness in the sector.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a solid security posture with enforced HTTPS, modern security headers, and no visible exposure of sensitive data. The use of nonce attributes in scripts and integration of reputable analytics tools further enhance security. However, the absence of a dedicated security policy page, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms represents a gap in transparency and preparedness. Compliance with GDPR and cookie consent mechanisms is evident, supporting privacy best practices. Overall, the security maturity is good but could be improved by adding explicit security governance documentation and incident response information.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and commitments.
  2. Implement a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  3. Provide clear incident response contact information for security issues.
  4. Regularly review and update third-party libraries and analytics tools to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance transparency around data retention policies and user privacy protections.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Oxfam Australia
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Oxfam Australia
Description
Oxfam Australia is a non-profit organization dedicated to fighting inequality and ending poverty by working alongside local partners and communities to deliver humanitarian relief, long-term development projects, and advocacy campaigns.
Key services
Advocacy and campaigns, Humanitarian aid, Long-term development projects, Fundraising and philanthropy, Volunteer engagement
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Bootstrap 5, jQuery, Swiper.js, Google Tag Manager, Hotjar, Visual Website Optimizer (VWO)
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Security headers present
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of nonce attributes in scripts

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager, Hotjar, Visual Website Optimizer
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Hotjar, Visual Website Optimizer
Marketing tools
Hotjar, Visual Website Optimizer
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. WHOIS data is limited due to registrar policy and privacy, no suspicious data found.
  3. Strong presence of structured data and metadata for SEO and social sharing.
  4. Multiple calls to action for donations, volunteering, and advocacy.
  5. Use of modern web technologies and analytics tools.
  6. Clear contact information including phone, email, and physical address.
  7. No evidence of security policy or incident response pages publicly available.
  8. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found.
  9. Content is safe and appropriate for general audiences.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a WordPress CMS platform using Bootstrap 5 for responsive design and jQuery for client-side scripting. It integrates advanced tools such as Google Tag Manager for analytics, Hotjar for user behavior tracking, and Visual Website Optimizer for A/B testing and optimization. The site uses Swiper.js for interactive carousels and lazy loading for images to improve performance. The technical implementation is modern and well-structured, with good mobile optimization and accessibility features. Hosting details are not explicitly identified but the site performs moderately well. Opportunities exist to improve performance further by optimizing script loading and caching strategies.
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 oxfam.org.au. 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 oxfam.org.au.

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.