Skip to main content

Security report for streetsforall.org

Streets For All · Non-profit · United States

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

70/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Streets For All is a small non-profit organization focused on transportation advocacy primarily in Los Angeles, with a sister chapter in San Francisco. The organization campaigns for safer streets, improved bus and bike lanes, and pedestrian-friendly urban environments. Their website serves as a hub for community engagement, volunteer recruitment, membership, and donations. Technically, the site is built on Squarespace, leveraging modern web fonts, JavaScript libraries, and third-party services such as Mailchimp for email marketing and Facebook Pixel for tracking. However, the site lacks a valid SSL certificate, resulting in no HTTPS support, which is a critical security flaw. Security headers are partially implemented but insufficient to compensate for the missing SSL. Privacy and cookie policies are absent, and no formal security or incident response policies are published. Overall, the site provides good content and user experience but requires urgent improvements in security and privacy compliance to protect users and enhance trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 100 · Critical
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 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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Google APIs

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

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

Keep watching streetsforall.org

This scan found 20 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
90
Security headers
45
Email security
75
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
70

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 organization positions itself as a grassroots transportation advocacy group with a clear focus on urban mobility and climate change. Its business model relies on donations, memberships, and volunteer support. The presence of multiple social media channels and related partner domains indicates an active outreach and partnership ecosystem. The lack of formal privacy and security policies may expose the organization to compliance risks, especially given the personal data collected via email signup forms. The site’s technical reliance on Squarespace and third-party services simplifies management but also introduces dependencies. Growth opportunities include expanding digital security, formalizing compliance documentation, and enhancing performance metrics.

Security posture

The current security posture is weak due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS support, which is a critical vulnerability. While some security headers like HSTS, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options are present, they are not fully configured to maximize protection. No evidence of vulnerability disclosure, incident response, or security policy documentation was found. The use of third-party scripts and tracking pixels increases the attack surface and privacy concerns. Immediate remediation of SSL/TLS issues and publication of privacy and security policies are recommended to improve security maturity and compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Fully configure HSTS with includeSubDomains and preload flags to enforce HTTPS.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and other regulations.
  4. Implement and disclose a security policy and incident response contact information.
  5. Review and minimize third-party tracking scripts to enhance user privacy and reduce risk.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the Squarespace platform, utilizing modern JavaScript libraries and web fonts. It integrates Mailchimp for email marketing and Weglot for multilingual support. The site uses Facebook Pixel for analytics and retargeting. Performance data is missing, but inferred load time is slow. Mobile optimization is good, and SEO meta tags are properly configured. However, the lack of HTTPS and invalid SSL certificate severely impacts security and user trust. The site’s technical debt includes missing security best practices and incomplete privacy compliance. Modernization efforts should focus on securing transport layers and improving performance monitoring.
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 streetsforall.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 streetsforall.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.