Skip to main content

Security report for vantienhovenfoundation.com

Van Tienhoven Foundation · Other · Netherlands

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

59/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Van Tienhoven Foundation is a small non-profit organization based in the Netherlands dedicated to providing small grants for the protection of threatened species and key ecosystems worldwide. Their focus is on practical, community-led conservation efforts that generate sustainable environmental impact. The website is professionally designed using WordPress with modern technologies such as jQuery and Slick Carousel, optimized for mobile and SEO. Security posture is good with HTTPS enabled and no visible vulnerabilities, though security headers and cookie consent mechanisms could be improved. The absence of WHOIS data limits domain trust verification but the presence of official documents, contact information, and testimonials supports legitimacy. Overall, the site effectively communicates its mission and services to conservation stakeholders globally.

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

6 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 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

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

Keep watching vantienhovenfoundation.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. 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
72
Security headers
45
Email security
85
DNS health
60
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
53
Average
59

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 foundation operates in the niche environmental conservation sector, targeting NGOs, researchers, and community groups engaged in biodiversity protection. Its business model centers on grant-making to support species and ecosystem protection projects, emphasizing community management. The organization maintains a consistent brand and publishes annual reports and strategic plans, indicating transparency and accountability. While the domain appears recently registered or privacy protected, the foundation's content and documentation suggest an established entity. No partnerships or subsidiaries are explicitly identified. The foundation's market position is specialized and focused on impactful conservation grants.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS and no exposed sensitive data. However, the lack of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and absence of a cookie consent mechanism are areas for improvement. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are published, which could enhance security readiness and transparency. The site does not use tracking or analytics services that might raise privacy concerns. Overall, the security risk is low but could be further strengthened by adopting best practices and formal policies.

Recommendations

  1. Implement standard security headers (CSP, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner and detailed cookie policy to comply with EU regulations and improve privacy transparency.
  3. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to demonstrate readiness and build trust.
  4. Consider creating a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all visitors.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Van Tienhoven Stichting
Registration number
41198656
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Van Tienhoven Foundation
Description
The Van Tienhoven Foundation makes small grants available for the protection of threatened species and key ecosystems across the globe.
Key services
Grant funding for conservation projects, Support for species protection, Support for ecosystem protection, Community-managed nature protection initiatives
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery 3.6.4, Slick Carousel, Slick Lightbox, Yoast SEO plugin
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No visible vulnerable libraries

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is professionally presented and focused on conservation grants.
  3. No forms detected on the homepage; application forms likely on separate pages.
  4. No phone numbers found; contact primarily via email and physical address.
  5. No social media links detected in the provided HTML.
  6. No cookie consent banner or explicit cookie policy found.
  7. Security headers not visible in provided data; SSL is present.
  8. WHOIS data unavailable, limiting domain trust verification.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with a modern tech stack including jQuery 3.6.4 and Slick Carousel for UI components. It uses the Yoast SEO plugin for search engine optimization and includes structured data in JSON-LD format for enhanced search visibility. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization. No major technical debt or deprecated libraries were detected. Hosting provider details are not disclosed. The site lacks some advanced security headers and cookie consent mechanisms, which are recommended for compliance and security. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid and supports the foundation's mission effectively.
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 vantienhovenfoundation.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 vantienhovenfoundation.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.