Skip to main content

Security report for theintercept.com

The Intercept · Media · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

70/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Intercept is an established independent media organization founded in 2009, specializing in investigative journalism across politics, justice, technology, and global affairs. It operates a professional, content-rich website with a strong brand presence and multiple social media channels. The site is built on WordPress, leveraging modern analytics and performance tools, and is hosted with reputable providers including Cloudflare DNS. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and domain transfer protections, though DNSSEC is not enabled and explicit security policies are not published. Privacy compliance is partially met with a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of use, but lacks a visible cookie consent mechanism. Overall, the website demonstrates high professionalism, trustworthiness, and technical maturity, supporting its role as a credible news source.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 100 · Medium
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 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

  3. 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
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching theintercept.com

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
42
Security headers
75
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
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 Intercept maintains a strong market position as a progressive investigative news outlet funded primarily through donations and memberships, facilitated by a partner domain for payment processing. Its content targets a general audience interested in in-depth political and social reporting. The business model relies on independent funding and advertising, with a medium-sized operation under the parent company First Look Media. The website's consistent branding and excellent content quality reinforce its credibility and audience engagement. The partnership ecosystem includes social media platforms and donation services, supporting growth and outreach.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS with a valid SSL configuration and uses Cloudflare DNS, enhancing security and performance. Domain registration is transparent and consistent with the organization's history, with clientTransferProhibited status to prevent unauthorized transfers. However, DNSSEC is not enabled, which could improve DNS security. No explicit security policies, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are published, representing gaps in transparency and readiness. Forms are secured via HTTPS, and no sensitive data exposure or vulnerable libraries were detected. Overall, the security posture is good but could be improved with published policies and DNSSEC.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement a visible cookie consent banner to comply fully with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  3. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response information to improve transparency and trust.
  4. Establish a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking tools to minimize privacy risks and improve user trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
The Intercept
Description
The Intercept is a media organization providing original reporting and fearless journalism on politics, justice, technology, immigration, national security, environment, and world affairs.
Key services
Investigative journalism, News articles, Podcasts, Newsletter
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Google Tag Manager, Parsely, Jetpack, Cloudflare DNS
Frameworks
WordPress theme (Intercept), Yoast SEO
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • ClientTransferProhibited domain status
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security-focused DNS (Cloudflare)

Analytics and tracking

Services
Jetpack Stats, Parsely, Google Analytics (via GTM)
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
Jetpack (Automattic), Parsely
Tracking pixels
Jetpack Stats, Parsely
Marketing tools
Parsely
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professional media outlet with extensive original content.
  2. Strong branding and consistent design across pages.
  3. Multiple social media channels linked and active.
  4. Donation and membership options indicate independent funding model.
  5. No signs of malicious or suspicious content.
  6. No explicit security policies or incident response info published.
  7. No cookie consent banner detected despite GDPR relevance.
  8. Modern technology stack with WordPress and analytics tools.
  9. No phone numbers or direct email addresses publicly listed.
  10. Contact available via contact form on About page.
Technical notes

Notes

The Intercept's website is built on a modern WordPress CMS with a custom theme, leveraging Google Tag Manager, Parsely analytics, and Jetpack for performance and tracking. The site is optimized for mobile with responsive design and good accessibility features. Performance is fast with preloading of fonts and optimized images. SEO is well implemented with canonical tags, Open Graph metadata, and JSON-LD structured data for rich search results. Hosting uses Cloudflare DNS for reliability and security. The technical infrastructure is robust, supporting a high-quality user experience and scalable content delivery.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 69/100Medium32 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with theintercept.com. 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 theintercept.com.

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.