Skip to main content

Security report for theiij.org

The International Institute for Justice and the Rule of Law · Government · Malta

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

51/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The International Institute for Justice and the Rule of Law (IIJ) is a Malta-based non-profit organization focused on enhancing the competencies of criminal justice practitioners to address terrorism and related transnational crimes within a rule of law framework. The organization operates as an international hub providing capacity-building workshops, academic courses such as CTAC and eCTAC, and specialized platforms like CT-PHARE to promote human rights engagement in counter-terrorism. Their market position is that of a recognized institution supported by international partners including the UN and EU, targeting government officials, justice practitioners, and stakeholders globally. Technically, the IIJ website is built on WordPress 6.8 with a modern tech stack including Bootstrap, jQuery, and various plugins for SEO, multilingual support, and forms. The site demonstrates good performance, mobile optimization, and accessibility features. Security is robust with HTTPS enforced, Google reCAPTCHA protecting forms, and no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data. However, some security headers could be explicitly implemented for enhanced protection. Privacy compliance is strong with clearly accessible privacy and cookie policies, including consent mechanisms and GDPR alignment. Contact information is comprehensive, including email, phone, physical address, and a secure contact form. No terms of service or explicit security policy pages were found, which could be areas for improvement. Overall, the IIJ website presents a professional, trustworthy, and secure digital presence consistent with its mission and organizational claims. The domain registration details align well with the business history and location, supporting legitimacy. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security headers, publishing a security policy, and adding vulnerability disclosure information to further strengthen trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
43/ 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

3 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

    • 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

  2. 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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

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

Keep watching theiij.org

This scan found 16 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
0
Security headers
80
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
43
Average
51

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

IIJ holds a strong position in the international non-profit sector focused on justice and rule of law capacity building. Its competitive advantage lies in its specialized academic programs and partnerships with global institutions. The business model centers on delivering training and capacity-building services to criminal justice practitioners worldwide. Revenue streams likely include donor funding and grants, as indicated by the presence of donor acknowledgments and partnerships. The target customer segments include government officials, prosecutors, investigators, and judges involved in counter-terrorism efforts. Growth indicators include expanding academic offerings and new initiatives like CT-PHARE. The partnership ecosystem is robust, involving UN agencies, EU bodies, and other international organizations, enhancing credibility and reach.

Security posture

The IIJ website exhibits a mature security posture with HTTPS enforced and use of Google reCAPTCHA to mitigate automated abuse of forms. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options suggests room for improvement. There is no publicly available security policy or incident response contact, which are important for transparency and readiness. The site uses trusted third-party plugins and maintains good hygiene in form security. Overall, the security maturity is good but could be enhanced by formalizing policies and improving header configurations.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and explicitly configure security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and incident response procedures to improve transparency and trust.
  3. Add a vulnerability disclosure policy and security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party plugins and dependencies to mitigate risks from vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance monitoring and logging capabilities to detect and respond to potential security incidents promptly.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
The International Institute for Justice and the Rule of Law
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
The International Institute for Justice and the Rule of Law
Description
Building the Capacity of Criminal Justice Practitioners
Key services
Capacity-building workshops, Academic courses (CTAC, eCTAC), Counter-Terrorism Platform for Human Rights Engagement (CT-PHARE), Administration and outreach support
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.8, Yoast SEO plugin, Gravity Forms, Google reCAPTCHA, jQuery, Bootstrap, FontAwesome, Swiper.js, Mmenu, Magnific Popup, Fancybox, WPML (multilingual plugin)
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Google reCAPTCHA on forms
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security plugins (Gravity Forms with captcha)

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Google reCAPTCHA
Marketing tools
Mailchimp for WordPress
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and well-structured
  2. Content is rich and relevant to the organization's mission
  3. Multiple language support via WPML plugin
  4. Use of modern web technologies and security best practices
  5. Contact information is clearly provided including physical address, phone, email, and contact form
  6. No evidence of malicious or suspicious content
  7. No explicit terms of service page found
  8. Privacy and cookie policies are present and appear comprehensive
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a stable and widely used CMS platform, WordPress 6.8, leveraging a modern tech stack including Bootstrap for responsive design, jQuery for interactivity, and several plugins for SEO, multilingual support, and form management. Performance is moderate with lazy loading implemented for images and videos, and the site is mobile optimized. Accessibility features such as skip links and ARIA roles are present, supporting usability. The site uses CDN resources for fonts and scripts, improving load times. Technical risks are minimal but include potential plugin vulnerabilities and the need for enhanced security headers. Overall, the infrastructure supports the organization's mission effectively with opportunities for modernization and security hardening.
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 theiij.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 theiij.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.