Skip to main content

Security report for wanawards.com

World Architecture News Awards · Real Estate · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

66/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The WAN Awards website serves as a global platform celebrating excellence in architecture and design, targeting architects, design firms, and industry professionals worldwide. It offers detailed information about award categories, entry deadlines, and amplification services for winners, positioning itself as a prestigious and recognized awards program in the architecture sector. The site leverages modern web technologies and external services such as Google Analytics and Tag Manager to manage user engagement and performance tracking. However, the absence of WHOIS registration data raises concerns about domain legitimacy, despite the professional presentation and active content. Security posture is generally good with HTTPS enforced, but lacks some security headers and explicit privacy and cookie policies, which impacts privacy compliance. Overall, the site is functional and informative but would benefit from enhanced transparency and security practices to improve trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
73/ 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. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

  2. 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';…

  3. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

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

Keep watching wanawards.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
75
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
73
Average
66

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

WAN Awards operates in the real estate and hospitality sectors, focusing on architecture and design awards. Its business model relies on entry fees, sponsorships, and amplification packages for winners. The platform targets a global audience of architects and design professionals, offering diverse award categories and a respected judging panel. The use of third-party survey and event management platforms indicates a partnership ecosystem supporting event logistics. The lack of publicly available WHOIS data is unusual and warrants further investigation. The website content and structure suggest a medium-sized organization with a strong market position in the architecture awards niche.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses reputable third-party analytics and tag management services, indicating a baseline security maturity. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options reduces protection against common web attacks. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the provided content. Privacy compliance is weak due to missing privacy and cookie policies and lack of consent mechanisms. Incident response and security policy information are not publicly available, limiting transparency. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be significantly improved by implementing recommended headers, policies, and contact channels.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with GDPR compliance and user consent mechanisms.
  2. Add security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection.
  3. Clarify domain registration status and ensure WHOIS data is accurate and publicly available to improve trust.
  4. Provide clear contact information including security incident response contacts to enhance transparency.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and dependencies to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
World Architecture News Awards
Description
The World Architecture News Awards celebrates groundbreaking architecture, elevating firms through global recognition. The WAN Awards are recognised as one of the industry's most prestigious accolades, championing emerging talent and seasoned experts aiming to expand into new global audiences.
Key services
Architecture and design awards, Entry kit and submission management, Amplification packages for winners, Sponsorship opportunities
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Tiny Slider, Font Awesome, Lightbox2, Magnific Popup
Platforms
Azure Web Core (static assets hosting)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google Tag Manager asynchronously
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content about WAN Awards 2026
  2. No WHOIS registration data found, domain may be unregistered or WHOIS data is hidden
  3. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service pages detected
  4. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found in the visible content
  5. Use of multiple external trusted domains for fonts, analytics, and surveys
  6. No security headers detected in provided data; SSL is present and good
  7. No forms detected in the provided HTML snippet
  8. Content is professional, focused on architecture awards and categories
  9. No adult or questionable content detected
  10. Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager scripts are used for tracking
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern front-end stack with HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript libraries such as Tiny Slider, Font Awesome, Lightbox2, and Magnific Popup. It integrates Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics for tracking and performance monitoring. Static assets are hosted on Microsoft Azure Web Core, indicating reliable hosting infrastructure. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and good SEO meta tags. Accessibility features are basic but present. Performance is moderate, with asynchronous loading of scripts. No CMS or backend platform was detected from the provided data. Technical debt appears low, but improvements in security headers and privacy compliance are needed to reduce 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 wanawards.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 wanawards.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.