Skip to main content

Security report for rollingstone.com

Rolling Stone · Media · United States

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

79/100

Risk levelLow

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

Rolling Stone is a prominent media brand specializing in music, film, TV, and political news coverage. The website presents a professional and content-rich platform targeting a general audience interested in entertainment and current affairs. The brand is well-established and owned by Penske Media Corporation (PMC), reflecting a large-scale media operation. Technically, the site leverages WordPress CMS with modern tracking and advertising technologies such as Google Tag Manager, Cxense, and OneTrust for consent management. The site is mobile-optimized with good SEO and accessibility features, though some improvements in security headers and explicit privacy policies could enhance its posture. Security-wise, HTTPS is enforced and consent mechanisms are in place, but explicit security policies and vulnerability disclosures are absent. Overall, the site is trustworthy and professionally maintained, with no signs of malicious activity or content blocking.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
100/ 100 · Low
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

3 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"

  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
    • 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 rollingstone.com

This scan found 17 issues across 4 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
52
Security headers
40
Email security
100
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
100
Average
79

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

Rolling Stone operates as a major media publisher with a focus on entertainment and political news. Its business model relies on advertising revenue, leveraging partnerships with major ad networks like Google DoubleClick and BlogHer Ads. The target audience is broad, encompassing music and pop culture enthusiasts as well as politically engaged readers. The brand's market position is strong due to its iconic status and association with PMC. The website's technical infrastructure supports extensive user tracking and advertising, indicating a mature digital marketing strategy. However, the lack of publicly available WHOIS data suggests privacy protection or registry restrictions, which is common for high-profile brands. No direct contact information or detailed business registration data is publicly visible, which is typical for media brands focusing on content delivery rather than direct sales.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security posture with HTTPS enforced and cookie consent mechanisms implemented, including Google Consent Mode integration. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HSTS, and X-Frame-Options reduces the overall security score. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is published, which could be improved to enhance transparency and trust. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the provided content. The site does not appear to be behind a WAF or show signs of blocking, indicating stable accessibility. Overall, the security maturity is adequate for a media publisher but could benefit from enhanced header policies and published security practices.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service with clear URLs accessible from the homepage.
  2. Add security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options to improve protection against common web attacks.
  3. Publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Provide explicit contact information for security incidents or data protection officer to improve compliance and trust.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and ad networks to minimize privacy risks and improve user data protection.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Rolling Stone
Description
Get the latest Rolling Stone news with exclusive stories and pictures from Rolling Stone.
Key services
news coverage, exclusive stories, pictures, music, film, TV, political news
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Tag Manager, Cxense, OneTrust, WordPress, jQuery, Lazy Load plugin
Platforms
desktop, mobile
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Google Consent Mode implemented
  • Cookie consent mechanism present

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via GTM)
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
Google DoubleClick, BlogHer Ads
Tracking pixels
Cxense
Marketing tools
Google Consent Mode
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and professional design.
  2. No WHOIS data available publicly, indicating privacy or registry protection.
  3. Cookie consent and Google Consent Mode implemented indicating GDPR awareness.
  4. No explicit contact emails or phone numbers found in the provided content.
  5. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service URLs found in the snippet.
  6. Extensive use of third-party ad and tracking services.
  7. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information detected.
  8. No signs of adult or NSFW content.
  9. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with a modern tech stack including jQuery, lazy loading, and third-party analytics and advertising scripts such as Google Tag Manager and Cxense. The site uses OneTrust for cookie consent management and integrates Google Consent Mode for GDPR compliance. Fonts and assets are preloaded for performance optimization. The site is responsive and optimized for mobile devices with good SEO meta tags and structured data. Performance is moderate, with room for improvement in reducing third-party script impact. No hosting provider details were explicitly found. The technical infrastructure supports a large-scale media operation but could benefit from enhanced security headers and explicit privacy documentation.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 75/100Medium25 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with rollingstone.com. 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 rollingstone.com.

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.