Skip to main content

Security report for psy4f.org

Psychologists / Psychotherapists for Future e.V. · Non-profit · Germany

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

56/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Psychologists / Psychotherapists for Future e.V. is a German non-profit organization composed of psychologists and psychotherapists dedicated to applying their expertise to support sustainable futures. Their focus includes raising awareness, emotional coping, and constructive action regarding socio-ecological crises, supporting climate activists and groups, and protecting democracy and social cohesion. The organization maintains a professional web presence with active social media channels and publishes relevant content including articles, books, and talks. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with Elementor, uses modern libraries, and is mobile optimized. Security posture is good with HTTPS enforced and secure forms, though improvements are recommended in security headers and cookie consent mechanisms. WHOIS data is unavailable due to privacy protection, which is typical for non-profits. Overall, the site is trustworthy and well-positioned within its niche.

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

6 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 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 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

  3. 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 psy4f.org

This scan found 23 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. See sample alerts.

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
25
Email security
82
DNS health
80
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
53
Average
56

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 psy4f.org, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for psy4f.org right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

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

The organization operates in the non-profit sector focused on psychological support related to climate change. It targets psychologists, psychotherapists, climate activists, and the general public interested in mental health and sustainability. The business model is advocacy and support without commercial sales. The website demonstrates a consistent brand and professional content, with growth indicators such as published books and TEDx talks. The social media ecosystem is broad, enhancing outreach. No direct contact emails or phone numbers are published, which may limit direct engagement but aligns with privacy considerations. The organization appears stable and credible within its niche.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses secure contact forms, indicating a baseline security maturity. However, the absence of security headers like Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options reduces defense-in-depth. No vulnerability disclosures or incident response policies are published, which could be improved to enhance transparency and readiness. GDPR compliance is supported by a privacy policy, but cookie consent mechanisms are missing. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected. Overall, the security posture is good but could benefit from additional hardening and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to improve security posture.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner and mechanism to ensure full GDPR compliance.
  3. Publish a security policy and incident response plan to increase transparency and preparedness.
  4. Consider adding a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.
  5. Provide clear contact information for organizational transparency and user trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Psychologists / Psychotherapists for Future e.V.
Description
A non-profit organization of psychologists and psychotherapists contributing their expertise to promote a sustainable future by supporting climate activists, fostering awareness and emotional coping with socio-ecological crises, and protecting democracy and social cohesion.
Key services
Psychological support and counseling related to climate crisis, Workshops and events, Public awareness and education, Support for climate activists and groups
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.8.3, Elementor 3.32.5, Contact Form 7, jQuery 3.7.1, Font Awesome 5.15.3
Frameworks
WordPress, Elementor
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of secure forms (Contact Form 7)

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

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 in German with an English version available via a subdomain.
  3. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on the homepage or footer.
  4. Social media presence is strong across multiple platforms.
  5. No cookie consent banner detected despite GDPR relevance.
  6. WHOIS data is unavailable due to malformed request or privacy protection.
  7. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found.
  8. No explicit privacy or security policies beyond GDPR privacy policy.
  9. Website uses modern WordPress and Elementor technology stack.
  10. No advertising or tracking scripts detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress CMS platform using Elementor for page building and Contact Form 7 for forms. It uses jQuery and Font Awesome for UI elements. The site is mobile optimized and loads with moderate performance. SEO is supported with proper meta tags and structured content. No major technical debt or outdated libraries were detected. Hosting provider details are not disclosed. The site could improve accessibility features and implement additional security headers. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid and supports the organization's mission effectively.
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 psy4f.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 psy4f.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.