Skip to main content

Security report for raceforthecure.eu

Non-profit · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

58/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Race for the Cure is a European event organization focused on hosting the largest run and walk events across Europe, primarily aimed at charity participation. The website presents a professional and consistent brand image with clear navigation and a focus on participant engagement. Technically, the site is built on ASP.NET WebForms with Telerik UI components and integrates Google Analytics and Tag Manager for tracking. The site is mobile optimized and uses modern web fonts and libraries, though accessibility features are basic. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS enabled and IP anonymization in analytics, but lacks explicit security headers and visible incident response or security policies. Privacy compliance is weak due to absence of privacy and cookie policies or consent mechanisms. Business credibility is moderate with good content quality but no explicit contact or company information disclosed. Overall, the site is functional and professional but would benefit from enhanced privacy, security, and transparency measures.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
28/ 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

7 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.

    • Critical

      EU business without adequate privacy measures

      EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

      What to do: Implement comprehensive GDPR compliance including privacy policy, cookie consent, and data protection measures

    • 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. 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 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';…

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

Keep watching raceforthecure.eu

This scan found 28 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
62
Security headers
30
Email security
60
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
28
Average
58

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 raceforthecure.eu, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for raceforthecure.eu 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, organizing large-scale running and walking events to support charities across Europe. Their market position is strong as the largest run & walk event in Europe, targeting participants interested in sports and charity. The business model revolves around event management and fundraising. The website content and structure indicate a medium-sized operation with a focus on participant experience and charity promotion. There is no public information on company founding year or parent/subsidiary relationships. The use of professional web technologies and integration with Google services suggests a moderate digital maturity. Lack of public WHOIS data limits external trust verification. No direct revenue streams or partnership domains were identified from the content.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS with a good SSL configuration and uses Google Analytics with IP anonymization, indicating some privacy awareness. However, no security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, or HSTS were detected, which are recommended best practices. There is no visible security or incident response policy, nor contact channels for security issues. Forms are present but no explicit security measures or input validations were observed in the content. No vulnerable or outdated libraries were identified, but regular updates are recommended. The absence of privacy and cookie policies and consent mechanisms is a compliance gap, especially under GDPR. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be significantly improved with standard security headers, transparency, and incident response readiness.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with explicit user consent mechanisms to ensure GDPR compliance.
  2. Add standard security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Provide clear contact information including emails and phone numbers for general and security incident reporting.
  4. Establish and publish an incident response policy and vulnerability disclosure program to improve security transparency and readiness.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party libraries and frameworks to mitigate potential vulnerabilities and technical debt.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Race for the Cure is a European event organizing the biggest run and walk in Europe, focused on participation and charity.
Key services
Organizing races, Facilitating participation, Supporting charities
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
ASP.NET, Telerik UI, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Google Fonts, FontAwesome, Bootstrap, Flickity, Blazy
Frameworks
ASP.NET WebForms, Telerik
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Anonymize IP in Google Analytics

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
moderate
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on ASP.NET WebForms with Telerik UI components, indicating a mature but somewhat legacy technology stack. It uses Google Fonts, FontAwesome, Bootstrap, Flickity for UI/UX enhancements, and Blazy for lazy loading images. Google Analytics and Tag Manager are integrated for analytics and marketing. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design elements. Performance is moderate, with asynchronous loading of analytics scripts. Accessibility features are basic and could be improved. SEO optimization is good with meta tags and Open Graph tags present. Hosting provider details are not disclosed. The site uses a CMS platform likely DotNetNuke (DNN) based on module naming conventions. Technical risks include potential legacy codebase challenges and missing security headers.
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 raceforthecure.eu. 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 raceforthecure.eu.

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.