Skip to main content

Security report for thegef.org

Global Environment Facility · Government · N/a

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

Security score

77/100

Risk levelLow

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

The Global Environment Facility (GEF) website serves as the official platform for an international partnership focused on environmental funding and sustainability initiatives. The site provides comprehensive information about the organization's structure, funding mechanisms, projects, and stakeholder engagement. It targets governments, NGOs, civil society, and private sector partners globally. The website is professionally designed with clear navigation and rich content, reflecting a mature digital presence. Technically, the site is built on Drupal 10 CMS, leveraging modern JavaScript libraries and frameworks such as jQuery and Bootstrap. It integrates Google Analytics and Tag Manager for tracking and uses responsive design techniques to ensure good mobile usability. While performance is moderate, the site is accessible and well-structured. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS and avoids exposing sensitive data. However, it lacks visible security headers in the HTML source, which could be improved. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is publicly available, which is common for such organizations but could be enhanced for transparency. Overall, the website presents a low-risk profile with strong business credibility and good privacy compliance. The lack of WHOIS data due to privacy protection is justified given the organization's international nature. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security headers, publishing security policies, and improving transparency around incident response.

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

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: Google Analytics, Facebook, LinkedIn, 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 thegef.org

This scan found 17 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
95
Security headers
60
Email security
85
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
77

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

GEF holds a leading position as an international environmental funding mechanism, partnering with governments and organizations worldwide. Its business model revolves around facilitating and financing projects that address global environmental challenges. The website reflects a well-established ecosystem with multiple partner sites and a broad stakeholder base. The organization's content strategy emphasizes transparency, knowledge sharing, and stakeholder engagement, supporting its mission and reinforcing its market position. Growth indicators include active replenishment meetings and diverse funding programs. The partnership ecosystem is robust, linking to major global environmental and financial institutions.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security posture with HTTPS enforced and no visible sensitive data leaks. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options reduces its defense-in-depth. The use of third-party scripts like Google Analytics and AddThis introduces tracking but is standard practice. No public vulnerability disclosure or incident response contacts are found, which limits transparency. The site would benefit from publishing a security policy and incident response procedures to enhance trust and readiness. Regular updates and audits of Drupal and contributed modules are recommended to mitigate risks.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and configure security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy and vulnerability disclosure page to improve transparency and user trust.
  3. Establish and publicize incident response contact channels to facilitate timely reporting and handling of security issues.
  4. Conduct regular security audits and update all CMS components and third-party libraries promptly.
  5. Enhance privacy compliance disclosures, including detailed data retention policies and cookie management options.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Global Environment Facility
Description
The Global Environment Facility (GEF) is an international partnership of countries, international institutions, civil society organizations, and the private sector that addresses global environmental issues. It provides funding and support for projects related to biodiversity, climate change, pollution, sustainable forests, and other environmental topics.
Key services
Environmental project funding, Knowledge sharing, Stakeholder engagement, Policy and program development
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Drupal 10, jQuery, Bootstrap, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, js-cookie, Slick Carousel, Magnific Popup
Frameworks
Drupal
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced (implied by canonical and shortlink URLs)
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
AddThis
Marketing tools
AddThis
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website uses Drupal 10 CMS with modern front-end libraries
  2. Content is rich and well-structured with clear navigation
  3. Social media presence across major platforms
  4. No visible security headers in HTML source; recommend adding
  5. No exposed emails or phone numbers in HTML content
  6. WHOIS data is unavailable or privacy protected
  7. No signs of malicious or suspicious content
  8. Privacy and cookie policies are present and comprehensive
  9. No vulnerability disclosure or security policy pages found
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern Drupal 10 platform with a well-integrated front-end stack including Bootstrap and jQuery. It uses Google Tag Manager and Analytics for tracking user behavior and AddThis for social sharing. The site is mobile responsive and accessible, with good SEO practices such as canonical links and meta viewport tags. Performance is moderate, likely due to the use of multiple CSS and JS assets. There is no explicit hosting provider information. The site uses standard Drupal modules and custom themes, indicating a maintained and updated infrastructure. Opportunities exist to optimize loading times and enhance security configurations.
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 thegef.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 thegef.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.