Skip to main content

Security report for oxfam.org.uk

Oxfam GB · Non-profit · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 1 critical or high finding in SSL/TLS.

Security score

72/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Oxfam GB is a leading UK-based non-profit organization dedicated to fighting global poverty through humanitarian aid, advocacy, and community development. The website reflects a mature digital presence with comprehensive content targeting donors, volunteers, and the general public interested in social justice and poverty alleviation. The organization is part of a global confederation with sister sites in the US, Australia, and internationally. Technically, the site employs modern tracking and marketing tools such as Google Tag Manager and Abtasty, alongside a cookie consent mechanism compliant with GDPR. The site is well-optimized for mobile and accessibility, with good SEO practices and a professional design. From a security perspective, the website enforces HTTPS and includes standard security headers, indicating a strong baseline security posture. However, there is no publicly visible dedicated security policy or incident response contact, which could be improved to enhance transparency and trust. The WHOIS data is unavailable due to domain registration constraints, which slightly reduces trustworthiness but does not detract from the site's legitimacy given the organization's global reputation. Overall, the website demonstrates a high level of professionalism, security, and privacy compliance, suitable for a large non-profit organization. Strategic recommendations include publishing explicit security and incident response policies and maintaining vigilance on third-party scripts to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of oxfam.org.uk. View the latest report

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

1 finding rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

      Unable to retrieve SSL certificate

      Could not establish secure connection to retrieve certificate information

      What to do: Check if the server is accessible and SSL/TLS is properly configured

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

Keep watching oxfam.org.uk

This scan found 11 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
75
Email security
85
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
Average
72

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention oxfam.org.uk, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
9,089
Employees
141
Customers
8,278
Third parties
670
Weak passwords
9%

Latest record dated 2026-06-07 · 42 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for oxfam.org.uk.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • –jobs.oxfam.org.uk2026-06-07
  • –merlin.oxfam.org.uk2026-06-06
  • –merlin.oxfam.org.uk2026-06-06
  • –jobs.oxfam.org.uk2026-06-06
  • –jobs.oxfam.org.uk2026-06-06

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Oxfam GB operates as a large non-profit charity focused on global poverty and humanitarian aid. Its market position is strong within the UK and internationally through its confederation. The business model relies on donations, advocacy campaigns, and volunteer engagement. The website supports these activities with clear calls to action and integrated social media channels. The presence of sister domains indicates a broad partnership ecosystem. The organization targets a wide audience including donors, activists, and beneficiaries. Growth indicators include active campaigns and digital engagement tools. The website's content quality and branding consistency reinforce its credibility and trustworthiness in the sector.

Security posture

The website exhibits a good security posture with HTTPS enforced and multiple security headers implemented. Use of cookie consent and privacy policies aligns with GDPR requirements. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the content or scripts. However, the absence of a dedicated security policy page and incident response contact reduces transparency. There is no evidence of a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file. The use of third-party marketing and analytics scripts introduces a moderate tracking footprint, which is managed via consent mechanisms. Overall, the security maturity is good but could be enhanced by formalizing security governance documentation and incident response channels.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and commitments.
  2. Provide clear incident response contact information to facilitate reporting of security issues.
  3. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts to minimize security risks.
  5. Enhance transparency by listing certifications or compliance frameworks if applicable.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Oxfam GB
Description
Oxfam Great Britain is part of a global movement of millions of people working together to end poverty.
Key services
Poverty alleviation, Humanitarian aid, Advocacy and campaigning, Community development
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Tag Manager, Abtasty, Flockler embed, OneTrust Cookie Consent
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of security headers
  • Cookie consent banner implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Abtasty
Marketing tools
Abtasty
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 professional design.
  2. Strong presence of privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms.
  3. No visible security policy or incident response contact information.
  4. WHOIS data is unavailable due to domain registration constraints.
  5. Use of multiple third-party scripts for analytics and marketing.
  6. Social media presence is well integrated and consistent.
  7. No suspicious or malicious indicators found in content or links.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern technology stack including Google Tag Manager for analytics and Abtasty for marketing optimization. It integrates social media embeds and uses OneTrust for cookie consent management, indicating compliance with privacy regulations. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, with good SEO metadata and structured data (JSON-LD) describing the organization. Performance is moderate, likely due to multiple third-party scripts and rich media content. No CMS was explicitly detected, suggesting a custom or proprietary platform. Hosting provider details are not disclosed. Technical risks include dependency on third-party scripts and the need for continuous monitoring of security headers and SSL configurations.
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. 86/100Low21 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with oxfam.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 oxfam.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.