Skip to main content

Security report for savacommission.org

International Sava River Basin Commission · Government · Croatia

High risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

49/100

Risk levelHigh

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

The International Sava River Basin Commission operates as an intergovernmental organization dedicated to the sustainable management and development of the Sava River Basin. It provides a platform for cooperation among basin countries focusing on water management, navigation, flood protection, sediment management, and environmental preservation. The website reflects a professional and authoritative presence with comprehensive content and official documentation supporting its mandate. Technically, the website employs a modern technology stack including jQuery, Bootstrap, and Slick Carousel, with integration of Google Analytics and Tag Manager for user tracking. The site is mobile optimized and exhibits good performance and SEO practices. However, there is room for improvement in accessibility and security headers. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS and secure login forms but lacks important security headers and published security policies such as privacy, cookie, and incident response information. The absence of WHOIS data reduces domain trust verification, though the website content and contact details support legitimacy. Overall, the security posture is moderate with recommendations to enhance compliance and transparency. The overall risk assessment is low to moderate, with strategic recommendations focusing on publishing privacy and cookie policies, implementing security headers, adding vulnerability disclosure mechanisms, and improving WHOIS transparency to strengthen trust and compliance.

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

8 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"

    • 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 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

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

Keep watching savacommission.org

This scan found 25 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
67
Security headers
30
Email security
70
DNS health
70
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
35
Average
49

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

The Commission holds a strong regional position as a governmental and non-profit entity managing the Sava River Basin. Its business model centers on intergovernmental cooperation, regulatory frameworks, and technical project facilitation. The target audience includes government agencies, environmental bodies, and regional stakeholders. The organization benefits from trust indicators such as official documentation, consistent branding, and clear contact information. Growth potential lies in expanding stakeholder engagement and enhancing digital transparency. Partnerships with GIS and hydrological information systems indicate a collaborative ecosystem supporting its mission.

Security posture

The current security maturity is moderate. HTTPS is properly implemented, and secure login mechanisms are in place. However, the lack of security headers like Content-Security-Policy and absence of published privacy and cookie policies indicate compliance gaps, particularly regarding GDPR. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure channels are provided, limiting readiness for security incidents. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. Enhancing security policies and transparency would improve the organization's security culture and compliance posture.

Recommendations

  1. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with GDPR compliance details.
  2. Implement security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Create and publish a security.txt file to facilitate vulnerability disclosure and incident reporting.
  4. Add incident response contact information including security and abuse email addresses.
  5. Improve WHOIS data transparency or use a registrar providing full WHOIS details to enhance domain trust.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
International Sava River Basin Commission
Description
The International Sava River Basin Commission is an intergovernmental organization focused on the integrated management and sustainable development of the Sava River Basin. It facilitates cooperation among the basin countries on water management, navigation, flood protection, sediment management, and environmental protection.
Key services
Integrated water management, Navigation regulation and safety, Flood risk management, Sediment management, Environmental protection, Information management and GIS services
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery 3.6.0, jQuery UI, Bootstrap CSS and JS, Slick Carousel, Google Analytics, LightGallery, Modernizr
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Secure login modal with password field
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

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
high

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is comprehensive and well-structured for an intergovernmental commission.
  3. No privacy or cookie policies found, indicating potential GDPR compliance gaps.
  4. Contact information is clearly provided in the footer with official email and phone.
  5. No security.txt or incident response contacts published.
  6. WHOIS data is missing or malformed, limiting domain trust verification.
  7. Use of modern web technologies and analytics tools is evident.
  8. No advertising or affiliate marketing detected.
  9. Content is safe and suitable for general audiences.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a stable and modern technology stack with jQuery, Bootstrap, and Slick Carousel for UI components. Google Analytics and Tag Manager are used for tracking, indicating moderate user analytics capabilities. The site is mobile responsive and well-structured with clear navigation. Performance is moderate with no major issues detected. However, accessibility features are basic and could be improved. No CMS was detected, suggesting a custom or static site architecture. Hosting provider details are not available from the data. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports the organization's needs but could benefit from modernization and enhanced accessibility.
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 savacommission.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 savacommission.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.