Skip to main content

Security report for zinzendorf.de

Graf-Zinzendorf-Stiftung · Non-profit · Germany

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Graf-Zinzendorf-Stiftung is a small non-profit foundation based in Germany focused on promoting the legacy of Nikolaus Ludwig Graf von Zinzendorf, particularly in relation to church, mission, and society. The foundation supports projects primarily connected to the Evangelische Brüder-Unität – Herrnhuter Brüdergemeine and engages donors and supporters through its website. The site is well-structured, professionally designed, and provides clear contact information and privacy compliance features, including a cookie consent mechanism. Technically, the website is built on TYPO3 CMS with modern web technologies and demonstrates good mobile optimization and user experience. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enforced, but lacks advanced security headers and explicit security policies or incident response information. No analytics or tracking scripts were detected, indicating a privacy-conscious approach. The domain WHOIS data is limited but consistent with the foundation's profile, showing no suspicious patterns. Overall, the website is trustworthy, safe, and serves its target audience effectively.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
43/ 100 · High
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. GDPR outside view

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

    • Critical

      EU business without adequate privacy measures

      EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

      What to do: Implement comprehensive GDPR compliance including privacy policy, cookie consent, and data protection measures

    • 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

  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 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. 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 zinzendorf.de

This scan found 26 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
57
Security headers
30
Email security
70
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
43
Average
60

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

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 zinzendorf.de, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for zinzendorf.de right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

Monitor on Breach (opens in a new tab)

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 a niche religious non-profit sector, focusing on heritage preservation and mission support. Its business model relies on donations and project funding, facilitated through an online donation platform linked externally. The foundation maintains partnerships with related religious and archival organizations, enhancing its credibility and outreach. The website content and structure support donor engagement and information dissemination. Growth potential lies in expanding digital presence and enhancing transparency around security and compliance. The absence of terms of service and security policies suggests areas for organizational maturity improvement.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and implements a cookie consent banner, reflecting basic security and privacy compliance. However, it lacks visible security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options, which are recommended to mitigate common web vulnerabilities. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, which could hinder timely handling of security issues. No analytics or tracking scripts reduce privacy risks but also limit insights into user behavior. Overall, the security posture is moderate with room for improvement in headers and policy transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Implement standard security headers (CSP, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to enhance protection against common attacks.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
  3. Consider adding a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.
  4. Introduce terms of service to clarify user and donor rights and obligations.
  5. Maintain and regularly update privacy and cookie policies to ensure ongoing GDPR compliance.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Graf-Zinzendorf-Stiftung
Description
Die Graf-Zinzendorf-Stiftung fördert das Erbe von Nikolaus Ludwig Graf von Zinzendorf für Kirche, Mission und Gesellschaft, insbesondere im Zusammenhang mit der Evangelischen Brüder-Unität – Herrnhuter Brüdergemeine.
Key services
Projektförderung, Spendenakquise, Informationsbereitstellung über Zinzendorf und Brüder-Unität
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
TYPO3 CMS, FontAwesome, Bootstrap (implied by navbar classes), JavaScript
Frameworks
TYPO3
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent implemented

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 in German and targeted at a non-profit religious foundation audience.
  3. Clear contact information and privacy compliance are present.
  4. No visible security headers detected; opportunity for improvement.
  5. No analytics or tracking scripts detected, indicating privacy-conscious design.
  6. No terms of service page found.
  7. No incident response or security policy information found.
  8. Website uses TYPO3 CMS and standard web technologies.
  9. External links point to related religious and foundation partner sites.
  10. No advertising or marketing tools detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses TYPO3 CMS, a mature and widely used content management system, ensuring a stable and maintainable platform. The front-end leverages FontAwesome icons and Bootstrap-like responsive design elements, providing good mobile optimization and user experience. Performance is moderate with compressed CSS and JS assets, but no explicit hosting provider or CDN information was found. Accessibility features are basic but present. SEO optimization is basic with meta tags and canonical links but could be enhanced with structured data and richer metadata. No analytics or marketing tools are detected, indicating minimal tracking and a privacy-focused approach. Technical risks are low but could be mitigated further by adopting security best practices and improving transparency.
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 zinzendorf.de. 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 zinzendorf.de.

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.