Skip to main content

Security report for pcissc.org

PCI Security Standards Council · Finance · N/a

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

84/100

Risk levelLow

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

The PCI Security Standards Council (PCI SSC) is a globally recognized non-profit organization dedicated to developing and promoting payment data security standards. The website serves as a comprehensive resource hub for payment industry stakeholders, offering standards documentation, training programs, certification listings, and community event information. The organization holds a strong market position as the authoritative body for PCI compliance and payment security best practices. Technically, the website is built on a modern WordPress CMS with Elementor and Yoast SEO plugins, ensuring good SEO and mobile responsiveness. The site loads with moderate performance and includes essential user experience features such as clear navigation and search functionality. Security-wise, the site enforces HTTPS and employs secure forms but lacks explicit security headers and a public security policy or vulnerability disclosure page. Overall, the security posture is solid with no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data. Privacy compliance is partial, with a cookie consent mechanism present but no explicit privacy policy detected in the provided content. The absence of direct contact information and WHOIS data limits full verification but the strong branding and social media presence support legitimacy. Strategically, the site should enhance transparency by publishing privacy and security policies, adding contact details for incident response, and implementing security headers to improve defense in depth. These steps will strengthen trust and compliance posture for stakeholders relying on PCI SSC standards.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
65/ 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

3 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 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 pcissc.org

This scan found 12 issues across 5 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
65
Security headers
95
Email security
100
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
65
Average
84

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 pcissc.org, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
216
Employees
0
Customers
216
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
15%

5 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 pcissc.org.

Select it in the checkout above.

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

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

PCI SSC operates as a key standards organization within the finance sector, focusing on payment security. Its business model revolves around developing industry-driven standards, providing training and certification programs, and maintaining professional listings. The organization targets payment processors, merchants, software vendors, and security professionals globally. Its competitive advantage lies in its authoritative standards and broad industry acceptance. Revenue streams likely include training fees, certification programs, and membership dues. The partnership ecosystem includes payment brands and security assessors. The organization's operations reflect maturity and a strong market presence in payment security compliance.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with HTTPS enforced and secure handling of user inputs. However, the lack of explicit security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options reduces defense in depth. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files were found, limiting transparency for security researchers. The absence of direct contact information for security incidents is a gap in incident response readiness. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected. Overall, the site aligns with good security practices but can improve in policy transparency and header implementation.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy page detailing data handling and GDPR compliance.
  2. Implement and configure security headers including CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options.
  3. Add a dedicated security policy or incident response page with contact channels.
  4. Provide a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  5. Include clear contact information for general and security-related inquiries to enhance trust.

Contact details published on the site

Registration number
Registration Now
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
PCI Security Standards Council
Description
A global forum that brings together payments industry stakeholders to develop and drive adoption of data security standards and resources for safe payments.
Key services
Development of PCI Security Standards, Training and Qualification Programs, Certification and Professional Listings, Product and Solutions Listings, Events and Community Meetings
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.6.2, Yoast SEO Premium, Elementor 3.26.4, FontAwesome, Google Tag Manager
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure forms with proper input fields

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

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 navigation.
  2. No WHOIS data available due to malformed request or privacy protection.
  3. Strong branding and consistent professional design.
  4. Comprehensive PCI standards and training resources offered.
  5. Cookie consent mechanism present and functional.
  6. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages detected in provided content.
  7. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found in the HTML content.
  8. Social media presence is strong with official accounts linked.
  9. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found.
  10. HTTPS is enforced with no visible security warnings.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is powered by WordPress 6.6.2 with Elementor and Yoast SEO Premium plugins, indicating a modern and SEO-optimized infrastructure. The use of FontAwesome and Google Tag Manager supports rich UI and analytics capabilities. Performance is moderate, with good mobile optimization and accessibility features. The site uses structured data (JSON-LD) for enhanced search engine understanding. No hosting provider details were identified from the content. Technical debt appears low, but adding security headers and improving privacy documentation would enhance the technical maturity and risk posture.
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 pcissc.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 pcissc.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.