Skip to main content

Security report for washingtonpost.com

The Washington Post · Media · United States

Partial score · DNS & email only

69/100

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

The Washington Post is a leading American news media organization established in 1877, providing comprehensive coverage of U.S. and international news, politics, business, technology, and more. It operates a large-scale digital platform with a subscription-based business model complemented by advertising revenue. The website demonstrates a mature digital infrastructure leveraging modern web technologies such as Next.js, Google Tag Manager, and various advertising and analytics platforms. Security practices are robust, with HTTPS enforced, strong security headers, and privacy compliance including GDPR adherence. No critical vulnerabilities or blocking mechanisms were detected, indicating a secure and accessible platform. Overall, the site reflects a high level of professionalism, trustworthiness, and technical sophistication.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of washingtonpost.com. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
85/ 100 · Low
Checks completed
6of 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

2 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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.

    • Critical

      Unable to retrieve SSL certificate

      Could not establish secure connection to retrieve certificate information

      What to do: Check if the server is accessible and SSL/TLS is properly configured

  2. 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 washingtonpost.com

This scan found 8 issues across 5 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
0
Email security
72
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
85
Average
69

Not counted

  • Security headers: did not complete in this scan.
  • 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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention washingtonpost.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
24,201
Employees
0
Customers
24,140
Third parties
61
Weak passwords
12%

53 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for washingtonpost.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

The Washington Post holds a strong market position as a major media enterprise in the United States, targeting a broad general audience interested in news and analysis. Its business model combines subscription services with extensive advertising partnerships involving major ad networks and tracking services. The company benefits from a well-established brand and a wide-reaching digital presence, including verified social media channels. The use of advanced analytics and marketing tools supports audience engagement and monetization strategies. The absence of explicit contact information on the homepage suggests a focus on digital interaction and subscription management through dedicated channels.

Security posture

The website exhibits a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, comprehensive security headers, and privacy APIs for consent management. The presence of a detailed privacy and cookie policy indicates strong compliance with data protection regulations such as GDPR. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the analyzed content. However, the lack of publicly visible incident response contacts or a security.txt file suggests room for improvement in transparency and vulnerability disclosure readiness. Overall, the security measures align well with industry best practices for a high-profile media website.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security.txt file to facilitate vulnerability reporting and improve transparency.
  2. Enhance visibility of incident response contact information to support timely security communications.
  3. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts to mitigate potential supply chain risks.
  4. Maintain and update security headers and SSL configurations to adhere to evolving standards.
  5. Continue monitoring GDPR compliance and user consent mechanisms to ensure ongoing privacy adherence.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
The Washington Post
Description
Breaking news, live coverage, investigations, analysis, video, photos and opinions from The Washington Post. Subscribe for the latest on U.S. and international news, politics, business, technology, climate change, health and wellness, sports, science, weather, lifestyle and more.
Key services
news reporting, video content, investigations, analysis, subscriptions
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, React (implied by next.js usage), Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Chartbeat, DoubleClick, Criteo, Outbrain, Casale Media, Amazon Ads, Teads, Permutive
Frameworks
Next.js
Platforms
Web
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Content Security Policy present
  • Privacy API and consent management implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data detected

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Chartbeat, Permutive
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google AdTech, AppNexus (secure.adnxs.com), Criteo, Outbrain, Casale Media, Amazon Ads, Teads
Tracking pixels
Chartbeat, Permutive, Outbrain
Marketing tools
Permutive
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a major, reputable news media outlet with extensive content.
  2. Strong privacy and cookie policies with GDPR compliance.
  3. Use of multiple third-party advertising and analytics services.
  4. Modern web technologies and frameworks employed.
  5. No signs of blocking or WAF challenges.
  6. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found on homepage HTML.
  7. Social media presence verified via structured data.
Technical notes

Notes

The Washington Post website is built on a modern technology stack including Next.js, JavaScript frameworks, and integrates multiple third-party services for advertising, analytics, and content delivery. Hosting appears to leverage Amazon AWS infrastructure, ensuring scalability and reliability. Performance optimizations and mobile responsiveness are well implemented, contributing to a fast and accessible user experience. The site employs advanced tracking and marketing tools, balanced with privacy compliance mechanisms. Technical risks are minimal, with opportunities for further modernization in incident response and vulnerability disclosure practices.
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. 69/100Medium16 findings · partial scanView report
  2. 69/100Medium16 findings · partial scanView report
  3. 69/100Medium16 findings · partial scanView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with washingtonpost.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 washingtonpost.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.