Country profile · Cyber resilience
Kosovo
We have no national CERT or cyber agency for Kosovo in our list. Not scored: too little recent World Bank data for a fair score.
UN-AssociateIMF-Not Member
None
National CERT
not in our list
20.0
Cyber resilience rating
E · Minimal · first pass, 3 of 7 pillars
Not ranked
Bloch Index rank
no separate Bloch Index score
First pass. This rating covers 3 of the methodology's 7 pillars, scored from evidence we already hold (treaty and adequacy registers, our own CERT list and collector, and passive checks of two government websites per country). It is a starting point, not a verdict: the remaining pillars, a wider government-domain sample and corrections from the countries themselves will move it edition by edition. Version v0.1 first pass, cut-off 2026-10-26.
Our cyber reasoning
The Cyber Risk Barometer rates countries on protection in practice, not on paper: each indicator is a public, checkable fact or something we measure ourselves. The seven pillars, their fixed weights and the A to E bands are set out in the methodology before any country is scored. This page shows every indicator we hold for Kosovo, with the evidence behind it.
How the rating is built
Each pillar is scored 0 to 100 from its indicators. The rating is the weighted mean of the pillars scored so far, on the fixed weights published in the methodology. The 4 pillars not yet scored are left out and the weights renormalised, so this is a preview, 3 of 7 pillars.
| Pillar | Weight | Score | Points |
|---|
| Gold-standard data protection | 20 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| National CERT in action | 15 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Government cyber hygiene, measured | 15 | 66.7 | 20.0 |
| Weighted mean | 20.0 |
| Cyber resilience rating | 20.0 · E Minimal |
Is the country bound by Convention 108/108+, or recognised by the EU or UK as giving equivalent protection?
Sources: Council of Europe Treaty Office; European Commission and ICO adequacy lists.
Is there a national CERT, and is it visibly working? Three of the six indicators are measured today from our own list and collector; the other three are still to be measured. Our daily collector reads every working feed, so "publishing" is observed, not declared.
| Indicator | Evidence | Points |
|---|
| ✗ A national (government-designated) CERT/CSIRT existsP2.EXISTS | No national CERT or cyber agency in our list | 0 / 4 |
| ✗ It is publishing: our daily collector sees a working feedP2.ACTIVE90 | No CERT to check | 0 / 4 |
| ✗ Machine-readable feed (RSS, Atom or JSON) or public advisoriesP2.FEED | No CERT to check | 0 / 1 |
| · It is a FIRST memberP2.FIRST | Not yet measured | – / 2 |
| · It publishes regularly (12 or more items in the last 12 months)P2.REGULAR | Not yet measured | – / 2 |
| · It publishes an annual report or statisticsP2.REPORT | Not yet measured | – / 2 |
Sources: Our national-CERT list (FIRST teams directory plus hand-added teams) and our daily feed collector; status checked 2026-10-26.
Government cyber hygiene, measured
15% of the rating
67/ 100 · 10 of 15 points
Do the country's own government websites and email domains follow basic security practice? First-pass sample: the national CERT's and the data protection authority's websites.
| Indicator | Evidence | Points |
|---|
| ✓ DMARC at p=quarantine or p=rejectP6.DMARC | 1 of 1 domains pass: aip.rks-gov.net checked 2026-10-26 | 4 / 4 |
| ✓ SPF record present and not +allP6.SPF | 1 of 1 domains pass: aip.rks-gov.net checked 2026-10-26 | 2 / 2 |
| ✗ DNSSEC: zone signed (DS record)P6.DNSSEC | 0 of 1 domains pass: none checked 2026-10-26 | 0 / 3 |
| ✓ HTTPS front page with a valid certificateP6.HTTPS | 1 of 1 domains pass: aip.rks-gov.net checked 2026-10-26 | 3 / 3 |
| ✓ Strict-Transport-Security headerP6.HSTS | 1 of 1 domains pass: aip.rks-gov.net checked 2026-10-26 | 1 / 1 |
| ✗ security.txt with a contactP6.SECTXT | 0 of 1 domains pass: none checked 2026-10-26 | 0 / 2 |
Domains sampled
| Domain | DMARC | SPF | DNSSEC | HTTPS | HSTS | security.txt |
|---|
| aip.rks-gov.netInformation and Privacy Agency (Agjencia për Informim dhe Privatësi, AIP) · data protection authority | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ |
A first-pass sample of the two government bodies most responsible for cyber and privacy. Passive lookups only: DNS records and the HTTPS front page.
Sources: Our own passive DNS and HTTPS checks of government domains.
These pillars are defined in the methodology with fixed weights and yes / partial / no indicators against a fixed standard. They appear here, with every indicator and its evidence, as each is scored.
| Pillar | Weight | Main sources |
|---|
| Citizens' rights protectedDoes a GDPR-grade law give people enforceable rights, and does an independent authority use its powers? | 20 | Statutes; regulator sites; our fines data |
| Incident reporting and transparencyMust serious cyber incidents and personal-data breaches be reported, quickly, and does the public get to know? | 10 | Statutes and regulator rules |
| Cybercrime law and cooperationCan the country prosecute cybercrime and work across borders? | 10 | Council of Europe Treaty Office (Budapest Convention); UN cybercrime convention status; FIRST membership |
| AI and emerging-tech safeguardsAre there binding rules for high-risk AI and for connected-product security? | 10 | Statutes |
Table: Cyber Risk Barometer · WLD-CRB-57 · Source: Cyber Risk Barometer national-CERT list (FIRST teams directory plus hand-added teams) and daily feed collector, status 2026-10-26; data/ratings.json v0.1 first pass
Context from the Bloch Index
Not scored: too little recent World Bank data for a fair score.