Skip to main content

Security report for raceforward.org

Race Forward · Non-profit · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

72/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Race Forward is a non-profit organization dedicated to advancing racial justice through policies, institutions, and culture. The organization provides training, resources, and advocacy to communities and public institutions, with a strong focus on government partnerships such as the Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE) and the Federal Initiative to Govern for Racial Equity (FIRE). Their market position is that of a recognized leader in racial equity advocacy with a medium-sized organizational footprint. The website is built on Drupal 10, leveraging modern web technologies and Google Tag Manager for analytics, indicating a mature digital infrastructure. The site is well-designed, mobile-optimized, and accessible, providing a professional user experience with clear navigation and relevant content. Security posture is good with HTTPS enabled and secure forms, though the absence of security headers and explicit cookie consent mechanisms are areas for improvement. WHOIS data is unavailable due to privacy protection, which is typical for non-profits, and the website content and external partnerships support the legitimacy of the domain. Overall, the site demonstrates a strong commitment to its mission with professional digital presence but could enhance privacy compliance and security best practices.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
58/ 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

5 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 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 raceforward.org

This scan found 19 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
65
Security headers
40
Email security
85
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
58
Average
72

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

Race Forward operates in the non-profit sector focusing on racial justice and equity. Their business model centers on providing educational training, advocacy programs, and resources to both communities and government entities. Revenue streams likely include donations, grants, and event fees, supported by a donation subdomain. The organization targets community advocates, government practitioners, and institutions seeking to implement racial equity strategies. Their partnership ecosystem includes well-known racial equity alliances and media platforms, enhancing their reach and credibility. Growth indicators include recurring annual reports, ongoing national initiatives, and a robust event calendar. Strategic observations highlight the organization's emphasis on narrative strategy and government collaboration as competitive advantages in the racial justice space.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a good security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and secure form handling. However, the lack of visible security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options suggests room for improvement in hardening the site against common web attacks. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. The absence of a published vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file indicates limited transparency in security incident handling. There is no explicit incident response contact information available, which could hinder timely reporting of security issues. Compliance with privacy regulations like GDPR is partial, as a privacy policy exists but no cookie consent mechanism was found. Overall, the security posture is solid but could be enhanced by implementing recommended headers, improving privacy compliance, and publishing incident response details.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options to improve site security.
  2. Add a clear cookie consent banner or mechanism to enhance GDPR and privacy compliance.
  3. Publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible security reporting.
  4. Provide explicit incident response contact information to improve transparency and responsiveness.
  5. Consider adding direct contact emails and phone numbers for better user trust and communication.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Race Forward
Description
Race Forward supports communities and public institutions to achieve a just multiracial democratic society through governance that advances racial justice.
Key services
Training, Events, Toolkits, Reports, Narrative Strategy, Government partnerships (GARE, FIRE)
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Drupal 10, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Typekit Fonts
Frameworks
Drupal
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

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

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, 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 professional design.
  2. No WHOIS data available due to malformed WHOIS response; likely privacy protected.
  3. No explicit privacy or cookie consent banner detected; privacy policy is present and comprehensive.
  4. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found; contact is via form.
  5. Uses Drupal CMS with modern web technologies and Google Tag Manager for analytics.
  6. No security headers detected in provided data; SSL is enabled and strong.
  7. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response info found.
  8. Social media presence on YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, Bluesky.
  9. External links to partner organizations and resources are legitimate and relevant.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Drupal 10, a modern and widely supported CMS, indicating a current and maintainable technical foundation. The use of Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics shows integration of standard analytics tools for user behavior tracking. The site loads CSS and JS assets efficiently and includes mobile optimization and accessibility features, contributing to a positive user experience. Performance is moderate, with no critical issues detected in the HTML content. The absence of hosting provider information limits assessment of infrastructure resilience. Overall, the technical stack is robust and appropriate for a non-profit advocacy organization, with opportunities to enhance security and privacy features.
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 raceforward.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 raceforward.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.