Skip to main content

Security report for transparencia.org

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

64/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The domain transparencia.org is currently a parked domain with no active website content. The site displays a domain-for-sale banner and loads an iframe pointing to a third-party domain, indicating no operational business presence. The website lacks any privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies, and no contact information or business details are provided. Technically, the site uses basic JavaScript and external scripts related to advertising and tracking but lacks HTTPS and security headers, resulting in a poor security posture. The WHOIS data shows the domain was registered in 2001 with Dynadot Inc and is consistent with a parked domain status, but no registrant organization information is available to verify legitimacy. Overall, the site is not trustworthy or professional in its current state and appears to be held for resale or future use.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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

8 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 Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1
    • High

      Missing X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

    • 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

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

Keep watching transparencia.org

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. 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
62
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
64

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

No active business or operational information is available on the website. The domain is old but currently parked, with no clear market positioning, services, or target audience. The presence of advertising scripts and domain-for-sale messaging suggests a business model focused on domain resale or monetization through parking ads. There are no indications of partnerships, subsidiaries, or strategic business operations.

Security posture

The website lacks HTTPS, security headers, and any visible security policies, resulting in a low security maturity level. The use of iframes to third-party domains without clear security controls introduces potential risks. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is present. The domain's DNSSEC is not enabled, and the domain status is clientTransferProhibited, which is standard for parked domains but does not enhance security. Overall, the security posture is weak and requires significant improvements to be suitable for business use.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate to secure the website.
  2. Add comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and other regulations.
  3. Remove or secure iframe content to prevent potential security risks.
  4. Publish clear contact information and business details to improve credibility.
  5. Enable DNSSEC and add security headers such as CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. Website content is blocked by domain parking with iframe redirect to third-party domain and no real content accessible. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript
Performance
slow
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
poor
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
20/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Ad networks
AdsDeli
Tracking pixels
youseasky.com
Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website is a parked domain with no original content
  2. Content is blocked behind an iframe redirect to a third-party domain
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found
  4. No contact information or business details available
  5. Multiple external domains related to advertising and tracking detected
  6. No security headers or HTTPS detected on main domain
  7. WHOIS data shows domain is old but no active business presence
  8. Website is not trustworthy or professional in current state
Technical notes

Notes

The website is technically minimal, primarily serving as a domain parking page with an iframe redirect to an external domain. The tech stack includes basic JavaScript and external ad/tracking scripts. There is no detected CMS or modern framework. Performance is likely slow due to iframe loading and external dependencies. Mobile optimization and accessibility are basic to poor, with no SEO optimization evident. Hosting provider details are limited to the registrar; actual hosting is unclear due to iframe usage. The site requires modernization and security hardening to support any legitimate business operations.
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 transparencia.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 transparencia.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.