Skip to main content

Security report for tpl.org

Trust for Public Land · Non-profit · United States

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

Security score

78/100

Risk levelLow

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

Trust for Public Land (TPL) is a well-established non-profit organization dedicated to creating parks and protecting public lands to ensure access to the outdoors for all communities. The website reflects a mature digital presence with comprehensive content, strong branding, and active engagement through social media and donation platforms. The organization positions itself as a leader in land conservation with a mission dating back to 1972, targeting a broad audience including donors, communities, and environmental advocates. Technically, the site leverages WordPress CMS with modern JavaScript libraries and integrates multiple analytics and marketing tools, indicating a robust digital infrastructure. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforcement, security headers, and no visible vulnerabilities, although explicit security policies and incident response contacts are not published. Overall, the site demonstrates high professionalism and trustworthiness, with minor recommendations to enhance transparency and security disclosures.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
65/ 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

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.

    • 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

  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.

    • 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 tpl.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. 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
75
Security headers
55
Email security
87
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
65
Average
78

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

TPL operates in the non-profit sector focused on environmental conservation and public land access. Its business model relies on community partnerships, public funding, and donations, supported by an extensive online presence and fundraising tools. The organization maintains a consistent brand and communicates effectively through multiple channels. Market positioning is strong as a recognized leader with decades of experience. The website's integration with fundraising and analytics partners supports efficient donor engagement and campaign management. Growth indicators include active social media, comprehensive content, and a wide geographic reach across US states. Strategic partnerships with fundraising and analytics providers enhance operational effectiveness.

Security posture

The website exhibits a mature security posture with HTTPS enabled and multiple security headers implemented, including CSP and HSTS. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. Forms appear to be secured with validation mechanisms. However, the absence of a publicly available security policy, incident response information, or vulnerability disclosure program limits transparency. The use of third-party scripts and trackers is extensive but common for non-profit fundraising sites. Recommendations include publishing security policies, incident response contacts, and a vulnerability disclosure framework to improve trust and compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and compliance.
  2. Provide clear incident response contact information such as security@ or abuse@ email addresses.
  3. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file.
  4. Regularly review and audit third-party scripts to minimize potential security risks.
  5. Enhance cookie consent mechanisms to improve transparency and GDPR compliance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Trust for Public Land
Description
TPL creates parks and protects public land so that everyone will have access to the benefits and joys of the outdoors. Their mission is to create parks and protect land for people, ensuring healthy, livable communities for generations to come.
Key services
Creating parks, Protecting public land, Community partnerships, Public funding advocacy
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, jQuery, Leaflet.js, Vimeo Player API, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, Fundraise Up
Frameworks
Yoast SEO, Gravity Forms
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of CSP
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure forms with validation

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Microsoft Bing UET, Facebook Pixel, Quantcast, Clarity, Hotjar
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Outbrain, AppNexus (adnxs.com), Quantcast
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, Microsoft Bing UET, Hotjar, Clarity
Marketing tools
Fundraise Up, Hotjar, Facebook Pixel
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professionally designed non-profit organization site focused on public land conservation.
  2. Content is rich, well-structured, and SEO optimized with extensive metadata and structured data.
  3. Multiple social media and donation integrations indicate active engagement and fundraising.
  4. No signs of malicious content or security issues detected.
  5. WHOIS data is unavailable, likely due to privacy protection or query failure.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with a modern tech stack including jQuery, Leaflet.js for mapping, Vimeo API for video content, and various analytics and marketing integrations such as Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, and Fundraise Up. The site uses Yoast SEO for metadata and structured data, improving search engine visibility. Performance is moderate with deferred loading of scripts and optimized images. Mobile optimization and accessibility are good, with responsive design and ARIA attributes. Technical debt appears low, but ongoing maintenance of third-party dependencies is recommended to mitigate risks.
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 tpl.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 tpl.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.