Skip to main content

Security report for qcin.org

Quality Council of India · Government · India

Low risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

77/100

Risk levelLow

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

Quality Council of India (QCI) is a well-established autonomous national body founded in 1996 under the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of India. It operates as a public-private partnership with key industry associations to promote quality standards, accreditation, and certification across various sectors in India. The organization holds a strong market position as the authoritative accreditation body with multiple specialized boards and divisions. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand image targeting government entities, industry stakeholders, and quality professionals. Key services include accreditations, certifications, training, and quality promotion initiatives.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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

5 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 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

    • 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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, Google APIs

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

  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

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

Keep watching qcin.org

This scan found 17 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
77
Security headers
80
Email security
85
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
77

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

QCI's business model is centered on providing accreditation and certification services, supported by government and industry partnerships. Its extensive network of boards and divisions such as NABL, NABH, NABCB, and others, positions it as a central quality ecosystem facilitator in India. The organization leverages digital platforms for outreach, including social media and dedicated portals like Quality Setu. The presence of grievance redressal mechanisms and public engagement initiatives indicates a mature operational framework. Growth indicators include recent initiatives and collaborations with digital commerce networks.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS with a good SSL configuration and uses domain status locks to prevent unauthorized domain changes. However, it lacks advanced HTTP security headers and a formal security or incident response policy. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file is present. The absence of a cookie consent mechanism and limited privacy compliance features are notable gaps. Overall, the security posture is moderate with room for improvement in compliance and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a comprehensive cookie consent banner to enhance privacy compliance.
  2. Publish a security.txt file and vulnerability disclosure policy to improve transparency.
  3. Enhance HTTP security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Develop and publish an incident response and security policy accessible to users.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party plugins and scripts to mitigate vulnerabilities.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Quality Council of India
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Quality Council of India
Description
Quality Council of India (QCI) is an autonomous national body established by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of India, set up through a PPP model with industry associations to promote quality standards, accreditation, and certification across various sectors.
Key services
Accreditations, Certifications, Training and Capacity Building, Quality Promotion Initiatives, Publications and Awareness, Grievance Redressal (CPGRAMS)
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Elementor, jQuery, Bootstrap, Google Fonts, FontAwesome, Swiper.js
Frameworks
Elementor, Bootstrap
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security status domain locks (clientDeleteProhibited etc.) in WHOIS

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed with clear navigation and structured content.
  2. Strong government and industry affiliation with multiple accreditation boards.
  3. No visible privacy or cookie consent banners, which may affect compliance.
  4. Use of modern web technologies and CMS (WordPress with Elementor).
  5. Social media presence across major platforms enhances trust and outreach.
  6. No signs of malicious content or security blocking mechanisms.
  7. WHOIS privacy protection is standard and justified for this entity.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS using Elementor page builder, Bootstrap framework, and modern JavaScript libraries like Swiper.js and jQuery. Hosting is provided via Amazon AWS DNS infrastructure. The site demonstrates good mobile optimization and SEO practices with structured navigation and meta tags. Performance is moderate, with potential improvements in loading speed and accessibility features. The technical stack is modern but requires ongoing maintenance to ensure security and performance.
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 qcin.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 qcin.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.