Skip to main content

Security report for rollingstone.com

Rolling Stone · Media · United States

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

Security score

75/100

Risk levelMedium

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 serves a broad general audience with high-quality content, including exclusive stories and pictures. It operates under the parent company PMC (Penske Media Corporation), reflecting a large-scale media publishing business model with a strong market position. The site demonstrates professional branding consistency and excellent content quality, targeting general consumers interested in entertainment and news. Technically, the website is built on WordPress and employs modern JavaScript libraries and third-party services such as Google Tag Manager, OneTrust for cookie consent, and Cxense for content personalization. The site shows good mobile optimization and SEO practices, though accessibility features are basic. Performance is moderate, with room for improvement in loading speed and technical modernization. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS and integrates cookie consent mechanisms aligned with privacy regulations. However, explicit security headers are not detected, and no public security or incident response policies are found. The absence of WHOIS data suggests privacy protection, which is justified for a major media brand. No vulnerabilities or suspicious patterns are evident, and the content is safe for general audiences. Overall, Rolling Stone's website is a professional, trustworthy media platform with a solid technical foundation and privacy awareness. Strategic improvements in security headers, incident response transparency, and accessibility could enhance its security posture and compliance further.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of rollingstone.com. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
85/ 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

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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

  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

  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 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

      SSL Certificate Expires Soon

      SSL certificate expires in 28 days

      What to do: Renew SSL certificate before expiration

      • NIS2 21(2)(h)
      • IR 2024/2690 9.2(c): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 9.2(c): Cryptography
      • NIST SC-17: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-17: Public Key Infrastructure Certificates
    • 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 5 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
42
Security headers
40
Email security
100
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
85
Average
75

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 holds a strong market position as an iconic media brand in the entertainment and political news sector. Its business model revolves around content publishing monetized through advertising networks such as Google DoubleClick and BlogHer Ads. The target audience is broad, encompassing music and pop culture enthusiasts as well as politically engaged readers. The company benefits from its parent company PMC's resources and brand portfolio. The website's integration with multiple marketing and tracking tools indicates a mature digital marketing strategy. Growth opportunities lie in expanding direct user engagement and enhancing privacy compliance to meet evolving regulations.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and cookie consent mechanisms in place. However, the lack of visible security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options represents a gap in best practices. No explicit security or incident response policies are published, which limits transparency and readiness perception. The use of multiple third-party scripts necessitates ongoing vigilance to prevent supply chain risks. Compliance with GDPR is partially indicated through consent tools but lacks explicit documentation. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a media site but could be strengthened by formalizing policies and enhancing technical controls.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to mitigate common web attacks.
  2. Publish clear security and incident response policies accessible to users and security researchers.
  3. Provide explicit contact channels for security incidents such as security@ or abuse@ email addresses.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts to reduce supply chain vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all audiences.
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
JavaScript, Google Tag Manager, OneTrust, Cxense, jQuery
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced (implied by URL)
  • Cookie consent mechanism
  • Google Consent Mode integration

Analytics and tracking

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

Advertising

Ad networks
Google DoubleClick, BlogHer Ads
Tracking pixels
Cxense
Marketing tools
Google Consent Mode, OneTrust Cookie Consent
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 publicly available, indicating privacy protection or registry restrictions.
  3. Uses multiple third-party ad and tracking services common in media publishing.
  4. Cookie consent and Google Consent Mode implemented, indicating privacy awareness.
  5. No explicit contact emails or phone numbers found in the provided HTML snippet.
  6. No explicit security or incident response policies found on the homepage.
  7. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt detected.
  8. Content is safe for general audiences with no adult or NSFW material.
  9. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is powered by WordPress CMS with a modern JavaScript tech stack including jQuery and Cxense for content personalization. Google Tag Manager and OneTrust are used for analytics and privacy compliance respectively. The site preloads multiple custom fonts and scripts to optimize rendering. While performance is moderate, the site could benefit from further optimization and modernization. Mobile responsiveness is good, but accessibility is basic and could be improved. The technical infrastructure supports a large-scale media publishing operation but requires ongoing maintenance to address security and performance risks.
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. 79/100Low24 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.