Skip to main content

Security report for sdf.org.uk

Scottish Drugs Forum · Non-profit · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS and Security headers.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Scottish Drugs Forum is a well-established non-profit organization dedicated to improving Scotland's approach to drug-related issues. The website serves as a national resource offering expertise, events, podcasts, and news to professionals and stakeholders in the drug policy and support sectors. The organization has a strong market position in Scotland, supported by a domain registered since 1998 and consistent branding. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with modern plugins such as Elementor, Yoast SEO, and GiveWP for donations, integrating secure payment processing via Stripe. The site demonstrates good SEO and mobile optimization, with a cookie consent mechanism in place. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enforced and secure payment integration, though explicit security headers and published security policies are lacking. Privacy compliance is partial due to the absence of a visible privacy policy and terms of service. Overall, the website is professional, trustworthy, and safe for general audiences, with recommendations to enhance security headers and publish privacy and incident response policies to improve compliance and trust further.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 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

4 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

  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 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';…

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

Keep watching sdf.org.uk

This scan found 23 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
57
Security headers
25
Email security
75
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
Average
68

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 Scottish Drugs Forum operates as a non-profit entity focused on drug issues in Scotland, targeting professionals and stakeholders involved in drug policy and support. Its business model revolves around providing expertise, organizing events, and disseminating information through podcasts and news. The organization benefits from a long-standing domain and consistent branding, indicating stability and credibility. Revenue streams likely include donations facilitated through integrated payment systems. The partnership ecosystem includes recognized service providers such as Stripe for payments and CookieYes for compliance. The organization's market presence is strong within Scotland, with no apparent subsidiaries or parent companies. Growth indicators include active event management and content updates. Strategic observations suggest opportunities to enhance transparency and compliance documentation to strengthen stakeholder confidence.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enabled and secure payment processing via Stripe. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options represents a gap in best practices. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response policies are published, limiting transparency and preparedness. Data protection practices include cookie consent management, but no explicit privacy policy is found, which may impact GDPR compliance. Incident response readiness is unclear due to lack of published contact channels for security issues. The security culture appears basic but functional, with room for improvement in policy publication and header implementation to mitigate risks and enhance trust.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  2. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service accessible from the website footer or main navigation.
  3. Develop and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.
  4. Add explicit incident response contact channels such as security@ or abuse@ email addresses.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party plugins and libraries to minimize vulnerabilities and technical debt.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Scottish Drugs Forum
Description
A national resource of expertise on drug issues focused on improving Scotland’s approach to drug-related issues.
Key services
Expertise on drug issues, Events and conferences, Podcasts and news dissemination
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 7.0, Elementor 4.1.4, Yoast SEO, GiveWP (donation plugin), Events Calendar Pro, jQuery, Stripe payment integration, CookieYes (cookie consent)
Frameworks
WordPress, Elementor
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Stripe for secure payments
  • Cookie consent banner implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Google Analytics (via Site Kit), Pinterest
Marketing tools
Google Site Kit, CookieYes
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professionally maintained non-profit resource focused on drug issues in Scotland.
  2. Uses modern WordPress CMS with popular plugins for SEO, events, and donations.
  3. Secure payment processing via Stripe is integrated.
  4. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented.
  5. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service found on the homepage HTML content.
  6. No explicit security or incident response policies published.
  7. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the provided HTML content.
  8. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
  9. Good SEO and social media integration observed.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress platform using Elementor for page building and Yoast SEO for search optimization. It integrates GiveWP for donation management with Stripe as the payment gateway, ensuring secure financial transactions. The site loads multiple external resources including Google Fonts, jQuery, and CookieYes scripts for compliance. Performance is moderate with good mobile responsiveness and SEO optimization. Technical debt appears low with up-to-date plugins and no visible errors. Opportunities exist to improve accessibility features and implement advanced security headers. Hosting provider details are not explicit, suggesting potential for further infrastructure transparency. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports the organization's mission effectively with room for security and compliance enhancements.
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 sdf.org.uk. 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 sdf.org.uk.

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.