WordPress.com
- Fair 1.7
- Easy 4.3
- Secure 3.0
FES Scores 9
| Pillar | Criterion | Score | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Easy | Day-one UX Can non-technical staff use it without a project? | 5 | Very easy to publish. Source |
| Easy | Operate Admin burden, updates, backups and language coverage. | 5 | Automattic operates it. Source |
| Easy | Integrate SSO, mail/CalDAV, APIs and common NGO connectors. | 3 | Fewer server-level integrations than self-host. Source |
| Fair | Lock-in / exit Can you leave with your data in open formats, at known cost? | 2 | Rule baseline (rubric_v1): global SaaS APIs/export exist, but suite gravity and remapping remain. Source |
| Fair | Sovereignty EU legal entity, EU hosting, and exposure to extra-EU lawful access? | 1 | Rule baseline (rubric_v1): non-EU legal entity + global SaaS — high extra-EU lawful-access exposure. Source |
| Fair | Openness Open source or open standards? Are independent implementations possible? | 2 | Rule baseline (rubric_v1): proprietary / non-OSI license — openness capped unless open standards dominate. Source |
| Secure | IT security Authentication, encryption, patch cadence and independent audit. | 4 | Platform security is professionally run. Source |
| Secure | User security 2FA, roles, phishing resistance and safe defaults. | 3 | Simple roles; jetpack-style extras add trackers if enabled. Source |
| Secure | Personal data GDPR fit: DPA, residency, sub-processors and Schrems II posture. | 2 | US processor unless a specific EU plan is contracted. Source |
Indicative scores from public information — how we score.