Skip to main content

Security report for psfmember.org

Python Software Foundation · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

54/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Python Software Foundation (PSF) operates as a non-profit organization dedicated to supporting the Python programming language and its community. The website serves primarily as a membership and donation portal, encouraging users to become supporting or contributing members to fund Python development, community events, and projects. The PSF holds a strong market position as the leading organization for Python advocacy and support, targeting developers and open source contributors globally. Technically, the website is built on WordPress CMS, leveraging common web technologies such as jQuery and hosted likely on AWS infrastructure. The site demonstrates moderate performance and good mobile optimization, with a consistent and professional design. However, it lacks advanced SEO and accessibility features and does not implement cookie consent or privacy policies visibly. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate and has domain transfer protections in place. However, it lacks DNSSEC and explicit security headers, which are recommended to enhance security posture. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is provided, and privacy compliance is minimal, with no visible privacy or cookie policies. Overall, the website is trustworthy and professional but could improve in privacy compliance and security best practices. Strategic enhancements in these areas would strengthen user trust and regulatory adherence.

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

7 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 Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1
    • 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 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

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

Keep watching psfmember.org

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
72
Security headers
20
Email security
70
DNS health
70
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
50
Average
54

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

The PSF is positioned as an essential non-profit entity within the technology sector, specifically focusing on open source software and community support. Its business model relies on memberships and donations, which fund key Python infrastructure and community initiatives. The organization targets Python developers, contributors, and supporters worldwide, leveraging its reputation and official status to maintain a strong market presence. The website reflects a clear call to action for membership and donations but lacks extensive marketing or analytics tools, indicating a focus on community rather than commercial growth. Partnerships or subsidiaries are not evident from the data, suggesting a streamlined organizational structure.

Security posture

The security maturity of the PSF website is moderate. HTTPS is properly implemented, and domain registration protections are in place. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options represents a gap in defense-in-depth strategies. No explicit security or incident response policies are published, which could hinder transparency and readiness in case of security events. Privacy compliance is weak, with no cookie consent or privacy policy visible, potentially exposing the organization to regulatory risks. The site does not appear to use tracking or analytics that might introduce privacy concerns. Overall, the security posture is adequate but would benefit from enhancements in policy transparency and technical controls.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement standard security headers (CSP, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to mitigate common web vulnerabilities.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies and implement a cookie consent mechanism to comply with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  4. Add a security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
  5. Consider integrating analytics with privacy-respecting configurations to better understand user engagement while maintaining compliance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Python Software Foundation
Description
The Python Software Foundation (PSF) is a non-profit organization that supports the development and adoption of the Python programming language. It facilitates community events, sprints, meetups, and supports projects such as Python Core Mentorship, Python Developer’s Guide, Issue Tracker, and PyPI. The site promotes membership and donations to support these activities.
Key services
Membership management, Donation processing, Community event support, Fiscal sponsorship, Support for Python development projects
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, jQuery, AWS DNS
Frameworks
WordPress CMS
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Domain status clientTransferProhibited

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. Content is focused on membership and donation for the Python Software Foundation.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies are explicitly linked or found on the homepage.
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers are explicitly provided on the homepage content.
  5. Website uses WordPress CMS with standard plugins and themes.
  6. No analytics or tracking scripts detected in the provided HTML.
  7. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found.
  8. No social media links explicitly found in the provided content.
  9. Site uses HTTPS with valid SSL and AWS DNS hosting.
  10. No explicit security headers detected in the provided data.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a WordPress platform with a child theme of Twenty Nineteen and uses jQuery for client-side scripting. Hosting appears to be on AWS infrastructure, as indicated by the DNS nameservers. The site uses standard WordPress plugins such as Profile Builder and a plugin to hide the admin bar based on user roles. Performance is moderate with deferred script loading and responsive design elements. However, there is no evidence of advanced SEO or accessibility enhancements beyond basic WordPress defaults. The site lacks modern security headers and DNSSEC, which are technical risks. Overall, the technical implementation is stable but could be modernized and hardened to improve security and compliance.
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 psfmember.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 psfmember.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.