Skip to main content

Is nyt.com a Scam? Security Check Results - The New York Times Reviews

nyt.com favicon

Is nyt.com Safe? Security Analysis for The New York Times

Check if nyt.com is a scam or legitimate. Free security scan and reviews.

MediaUnited Statesenterprise
ReactSentryDatadog RUMGraphQLABRA (A/B testing)+3 more
Analyzed 9/5/2025Completed 3:36:37 PM
78
Security Score
LOW RISK

AI Summary

The New York Times is a globally recognized media organization providing comprehensive news coverage, opinion, and multimedia content. It operates a subscription and advertising-based business model with a strong market position as a leading news provider. The website demonstrates advanced technical infrastructure, leveraging modern web technologies such as React, GraphQL, and robust analytics platforms including Datadog and Sentry. Privacy and consent management are well implemented, reflecting compliance with GDPR and other regulations. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforcement, security headers, and active monitoring tools, though no explicit vulnerability disclosure or incident response contacts are publicly available. Overall, the site is professional, trustworthy, and highly accessible, serving a broad general audience with safe content.

Detected Technologies

ReactSentryDatadog RUMGraphQLABRA (A/B testing)Fides (consent management)Fastly (CDN)Google OAuth

🧠AI Business Intelligence

Technology stack, business insights, and market analysis powered by AI.

Business Intelligence

Market & Strategic Analysis

The New York Times maintains a dominant position in the media sector with diversified offerings including specialized subsidiaries like NYT Cooking, Wirecutter, and The Athletic. Its revenue streams include subscriptions and advertising, targeting a global audience interested in news, politics, business, and culture. The company exhibits a mature digital ecosystem with extensive A/B testing and analytics capabilities, supporting continuous optimization. Partnerships and social media presence reinforce its brand authority. The lack of direct contact information on the homepage suggests a focus on centralized customer service channels. The company’s long history and consistent branding contribute to high business credibility.

Security Posture Analysis

Comprehensive Security Assessment

The website employs strong security measures including HTTPS, comprehensive security headers, and real-time error and performance monitoring via Sentry and Datadog. Consent management is handled through Fides, ensuring compliance with privacy laws. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analyzed content. However, the absence of a public security.txt or vulnerability disclosure page limits transparency for security researchers. Incident response contact information is not readily available, which could be improved to enhance security readiness. Overall, the security maturity is high, suitable for an enterprise media organization.

Strategic Recommendations

Priority Actions for Security Improvement

1

Publish a security.txt file to facilitate vulnerability reporting and improve transparency.

Observations

AI-powered comprehensive website and business analysis.

AI-Enhanced Website Analysis

Business Insights

Company:

The New York Times

Description:

Live news, investigations, opinion, photos and video by the journalists of The New York Times from more than 150 countries around the world. Subscribe for coverage of U.S. and international news, politics, business, technology, science, health, arts, sports and more.

Key Services:
News reportingOpinion and analysisVideo contentPodcastsSubscription servicesSpecialized content (e.g., NYT Cooking, Wirecutter, The Athletic)
Content Quality:

excellent

Branding:

consistent

Technical Stack

Technologies:
ReactSentryDatadog RUMGraphQLABRA (A/B testing)Fides (consent management)Fastly (CDN)Google OAuth
Frameworks:
React
Platforms:
WebiOSAndroid
Performance:

fast

Mobile:

excellent

Accessibility:

good

SEO:

excellent

Security Assessment

Security Score:
90/100
Best Practices:
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Sentry for error monitoring
  • Datadog RUM for performance and error tracking
  • Consent management with Fides
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics & Tracking

Services:
Datadog RUMSentryUnifiedTrackingABRA
Tracking Level:extensive
Privacy Compliance:good

Advertising & Marketing

Ad Networks:
MediaNet
Tracking Pixels:
Datadog RUMSentryGoogle Analytics (inferred)
Marketing Tools:
ABRA (A/B testing)Google OAuth
Transparency Level:good

Website Quality Assessment

Design Quality:excellent
User Experience:excellent
Content Relevance:excellent
Navigation Clarity:excellent
Professionalism:excellent
Trustworthiness:high

Key Observations

1

Website is fully accessible with rich content and advanced technical implementation.

🛡️Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis and recommendations.

Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis

90/100
Score

Missing Referrer-Policy header

LOW

Controls referrer information sent with requests

Sensitive data may be cached

LOW

Cache-Control header should include "no-store" for sensitive pages

👤GDPR Compliance

Privacy and data protection assessment under GDPR regulations.

GDPR Compliance

Privacy and data protection assessment

85/100
Score

No Cookie Consent Banner found

HIGH

GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

GDPR Compliance Analysis

Privacy Policy85% confidence
Cookie Policy85% confidence
Contact Information Found90% confidence
phone

🛡️NIS2 Compliance

Network & Information Security Directive compliance assessment.

NIS2 Compliance

Network & Information Security Directive

17/100
Score

No information security framework found

HIGH

NIS2 requires documented cybersecurity and information security measures

No vulnerability disclosure policy

MEDIUM

NIS2 encourages coordinated vulnerability disclosure

No security policy documentation found

HIGH

NIS2 requires documented cybersecurity governance and risk management

No incident response procedures found

HIGH

NIS2 requires documented incident response and business continuity plans

No business continuity planning found

MEDIUM

NIS2 emphasizes operational resilience and business continuity

No security contact information

HIGH

NIS2 requires clear incident reporting channels

No vulnerability reporting mechanism

MEDIUM

Clear vulnerability reporting supports coordinated disclosure

No NIS2 reference found

LOW

Consider explicitly mentioning NIS2 compliance efforts

📧Email Security

SPF, DKIM, and DMARC validation and email security assessment.

Email Security

SPF, DKIM, and DMARC validation

85/100
Score

No BIMI Record

LOW

BIMI displays brand logos in email clients

No MTA-STS Policy

MEDIUM

MTA-STS enforces TLS for email delivery

No TLS-RPT Record

LOW

TLS-RPT provides reporting for email TLS issues

SPF
Sender Policy Framework
DKIM
DomainKeys Identified Mail
DMARC
Domain-based Message Authentication
MX Records
Mail Exchange Records
BIMI
Brand Indicators
MTA-STS
Mail Transfer Agent Security
TLS-RPT
TLS Reporting
DNSSEC
DNS Security
SPF Details
Record:
v=spf1 include:nytimes.com._nspf.vali.email include:%{i}._ip.%{h}._ehlo.%{d}._spf.vali.email include:_spf.e.sparkpost.com include:amazonses.com ~all
DNS Lookups:4/10
Policy:~all
DKIM Selectors Found
Selector:google(1416-bit rsa)
Selector:k2(1416-bit rsa)
DMARC Details
Policy:reject
Aggregate Reports:dmarc_agg@vali.email

🏆SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis.

SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis

72/100
Score

Weak Protocols Supported

HIGH

Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

Certificate Transparency Not Implemented

LOW

Certificate is not logged in Certificate Transparency logs

Mixed Content Detected

MEDIUM

3 resources loaded over insecure HTTP

Partial SSL/TLS Assessment

LOW

Completed 3 of 4 security checks due to time constraints

Protocol Support

TLSv1.2TLSv1.3TLSv1.1

OCSP Status

OCSP Stapling Enabled

📊DNS Health

DNS configuration and security assessment.

DNS Health

DNS configuration and security assessment

90/100
Score

DNSSEC Not Enabled

MEDIUM

DNSSEC is not configured for this domain

Domain Registration Details

Domain Age
31 years(mature)
Expiry Risk
none(500 days)
Protection Level
strongDNSSEC OFF

DNS Records

A Records:151.101.193.164, 151.101.129.164, 151.101.65.164, 151.101.1.164
Name Servers:
dns1.p06.nsone.net
dns2.p06.nsone.net
dns3.p06.nsone.net
dns4.p06.nsone.net
ns-1328.awsdns-38.org
ns-1652.awsdns-14.co.uk
ns-244.awsdns-30.com
ns-635.awsdns-15.net
MX Records:
1: aspmx.l.google.com
10: alt3.aspmx.l.google.com
10: alt4.aspmx.l.google.com
5: alt1.aspmx.l.google.com
5: alt2.aspmx.l.google.com
SOA:Serial: 1, TTL: 300s

DNSSEC Status

DNSSEC Not Enabled

DNS Performance

Resolution Time:31ms

SPF Analysis

SPF Record:
v=spf1 include:nytimes.com._nspf.vali.email include:%{i}._ip.%{h}._ehlo.%{d}._spf.vali.email include:_spf.e.sparkpost.com include:amazonses.com ~all

Network Security

Port scanning and network exposure analysis.

Network Security

Port scanning and network exposure analysis

100/100
Score

Good Network Security Posture

LOW

No unnecessary services detected on common risky ports

🔧Technical Analysis

Detailed technical findings and analysis from AI assessment.

Technical Analysis

Comprehensive security assessment findings

Additional Findings

The New York Times website is built on a modern technology stack featuring React for frontend rendering, GraphQL for data querying, and advanced analytics and monitoring tools such as Datadog and Sentry. The site is hosted likely on AWS infrastructure with Fastly CDN for content delivery, ensuring fast performance globally. The implementation includes robust consent management and A/B testing frameworks, indicating a mature digital operation. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, with strong SEO practices evident from meta tags and structured data. Technical risks are minimal, with no visible outdated or vulnerable components in the provided content.
Analyze Another Website