Skip to main content

Is recordsofrights.org a Scam? Security Check Results - National Archives Reviews

recordsofrights.org favicon

Is recordsofrights.org Safe? Security Analysis for National Archives

Check if recordsofrights.org is a scam or legitimate. Free security scan and reviews.

GovernmentUnited Statesmedium
jQuery 1.10.2Modernizr 2.6.2jPlayerGoogle Analytics
Analyzed 9/5/2025Completed 3:49:03 PM
46
Security Score
HIGH RISK

AI Summary

Records of Rights is an official online and physical exhibition platform managed by the US National Archives, showcasing historical records related to American civil rights struggles. The website serves an educational purpose targeting the general public and researchers interested in American history and rights. It is supported by the National Archives and Records Administration and partners such as the National Archives Foundation. Technically, the site uses a custom or unknown CMS with common JavaScript libraries like jQuery and Modernizr, hosted by DreamHost. The site is moderately optimized for mobile and SEO, with good content quality and clear navigation. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled and domain transfer protection, but lacks DNSSEC and security headers, and does not have a cookie consent mechanism. Privacy compliance is basic with a privacy policy present but no explicit GDPR indicators or cookie consent. Business credibility is high due to official branding and consistent content. Overall, the site is trustworthy and safe for general audiences.

Detected Technologies

jQuery 1.10.2Modernizr 2.6.2jPlayerGoogle Analytics

🧠AI Business Intelligence

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

Business Intelligence

Market & Strategic Analysis

The website operates as a government-affiliated educational platform, leveraging archival content to engage a broad audience interested in civil rights history. Its business model is non-commercial, focusing on public education and archival preservation. The partnership with the National Archives Foundation and presence on multiple social media platforms enhance its outreach. The domain age and hosting provider align with a stable, medium-sized government project. The lack of direct contact emails or phone numbers suggests a controlled communication channel via suggestion forms, typical for government sites. The site’s market position is strong within the niche of archival exhibitions, with no direct commercial competitors.

Security Posture Analysis

Comprehensive Security Assessment

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level. HTTPS is enforced, and domain transfer is restricted, which are positive indicators. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security reduces the overall security posture. No vulnerability disclosures or incident response contacts are published, which could hinder rapid response to security incidents. The site does not expose sensitive data or use vulnerable libraries based on the provided content. Privacy compliance is limited, lacking cookie consent mechanisms and GDPR-specific disclosures. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a public informational site but could be improved to meet higher standards.

Strategic Recommendations

Priority Actions for Security Improvement

1

Enable DNSSEC to enhance domain name system security.

Observations

AI-powered comprehensive website and business analysis.

AI-Enhanced Website Analysis

Business Insights

Company:

National Archives

Description:

Explore records of the National Archives documenting the ongoing struggle of Americans to define, attain, and protect their rights.

Key Services:
Online exhibitsMuseum exhibitsEducational resources
Content Quality:

good

Branding:

consistent

Technical Stack

Technologies:
jQuery 1.10.2Modernizr 2.6.2jPlayerGoogle Analytics
Performance:

moderate

Mobile:

good

Accessibility:

basic

SEO:

good

Security Assessment

Security Score:
70/100
Best Practices:
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Client transfer prohibited domain status

Analytics & Tracking

Services:
Google Analytics
Tracking Level:moderate
Privacy Compliance:basic

Advertising & Marketing

Transparency Level:basic

Website Quality Assessment

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

Key Observations

1

Website is an official archival exhibition platform for the US National Archives.

🛡️Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis and recommendations.

Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis

20/100
Score

Missing Strict-Transport-Security header

HIGH

Forces HTTPS connections

Missing X-Frame-Options header

HIGH

Prevents clickjacking attacks

Missing X-Content-Type-Options header

MEDIUM

Prevents MIME type sniffing

Missing Content-Security-Policy header

HIGH

Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

Missing X-XSS-Protection header

MEDIUM

Legacy XSS protection (deprecated but still recommended)

Missing Referrer-Policy header

LOW

Controls referrer information sent with requests

Missing Permissions-Policy header

MEDIUM

Controls browser features and APIs

👤GDPR Compliance

Privacy and data protection assessment under GDPR regulations.

GDPR Compliance

Privacy and data protection assessment

53/100
Score

No Cookie Policy found

HIGH

GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

No Cookie Consent Banner found

HIGH

GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

No Data Protection Officer mentioned

LOW

Large organizations may need to designate a DPO under GDPR

Privacy policy may not be GDPR compliant

MEDIUM

Privacy policy lacks explicit GDPR compliance elements

GDPR Compliance Analysis

Privacy Policy85% confidence
Cookie Policy0% confidence
Contact Information Found90% confidence
phone

🛡️NIS2 Compliance

Network & Information Security Directive compliance assessment.

NIS2 Compliance

Network & Information Security Directive

2/100
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

Critical sector without clear security compliance

HIGH

Detected sectors: transport

📧Email Security

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

Email Security

SPF, DKIM, and DMARC validation

40/100
Score

No SPF record found

HIGH

SPF helps prevent email spoofing

No DKIM record found

MEDIUM

DKIM adds cryptographic signatures to emails

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

No email authentication configured

CRITICAL

Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

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

🏆SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis.

SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis

67/100
Score

Weak Protocols Supported

HIGH

Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

OCSP Stapling Not Enabled

LOW

OCSP stapling improves performance and privacy

Certificate Transparency Not Implemented

LOW

Certificate is not logged in Certificate Transparency logs

Mixed Content Detected

MEDIUM

18 resources loaded over insecure HTTP

Partial SSL/TLS Assessment

LOW

Completed 3 of 4 security checks due to time constraints

Protocol Support

TLSv1.3TLSv1.2TLSv1.1

OCSP Status

OCSP Stapling Disabled

📊DNS Health

DNS configuration and security assessment.

DNS Health

DNS configuration and security assessment

70/100
Score

DNSSEC Not Enabled

MEDIUM

DNSSEC is not configured for this domain

CAA Records Not Configured

LOW

Certificate Authority Authorization (CAA) records not found

Domain Delete Lock Not Enabled

LOW

Domain can be deleted without additional verification

No DMARC Record

MEDIUM

DMARC policy not configured

Domain Registration Details

Domain Age
12 years(mature)
Expiry Risk
low(246 days)
Protection Level
basicDNSSEC OFF
Suspicious Indicators Detected
  • Privacy/proxy registration detected

DNS Records

A Records:162.209.2.53
Name Servers:
ns1.dreamhost.com
ns2.dreamhost.com
ns3.dreamhost.com
SOA:Serial: 2025022000, TTL: 300s

DNSSEC Status

DNSSEC Not Enabled

DNS Performance

Resolution Time:164ms

Network Security

Port scanning and network exposure analysis.

Network Security

Port scanning and network exposure analysis

40/100
Score

Service Exposed: SSH

MEDIUM

Port 22 (SSH) is publicly accessible - SSH - Secure but can be brute-forced

🔧Technical Analysis

Detailed technical findings and analysis from AI assessment.

Technical Analysis

Comprehensive security assessment findings

Additional Findings

The website uses a traditional tech stack with jQuery, Modernizr, and jPlayer for media handling, indicating a somewhat dated but stable infrastructure. Hosting is provided by DreamHost, a reputable provider. The site is moderately optimized for mobile devices and SEO, with proper meta tags and responsive design elements. Performance is moderate, with no explicit indicators of slow loading but no advanced optimization techniques detected. Accessibility is basic, with no ARIA roles or advanced accessibility features evident. The lack of a known CMS suggests a custom-built platform, which may require dedicated maintenance resources. Overall, the technical implementation is solid but could benefit from modernization and enhanced security practices.
Analyze Another Website