The measured data reveals several key findings: Sites without critical violations have a pass value of 27%, while the pass value for missing alt text on images is 62%. Additionally, the pass value for weak color contrast, which is below 4.5:1, stands at 58%. For missing ARIA landmarks, the pass value is 51%, and for form inputs without labels, it is 43%. Full tables are provided below on this page.
Below: key findings, platform breakdown, implications, methodology, FAQ.
Free online tool — website security scanner: instant results, no signup.
| Metric | Pass/Value | Median | p75 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sites without critical violations | 27% | — | — |
| Missing alt on images | 62% | — | — |
| Weak color contrast (<4.5:1) | 58% | — | — |
| Missing ARIA landmarks | 51% | — | — |
| Form inputs without labels | 43% | — | — |
| Keyboard navigation broken | 34% | — | — |
| Missing lang attribute on html | 11% | — | — |
| Skip-to-content link | 8% | — | — |
| Platform | Share | Detail | — |
|---|---|---|---|
| Government (.gov.ru) | 10% | a11y pass: 42% | — |
| E-commerce (retail) | 22% | a11y pass: 18% | — |
| Banking / Fintech | 8% | a11y pass: 38% | — |
| Media / news | 15% | a11y pass: 24% | — |
| SaaS / tech | 12% | a11y pass: 47% | — |
| Landing / marketing | 33% | a11y pass: 22% | — |
Top-500 Russian sites (SimilarWeb.ru). axe-core 4.x via Puppeteer. WCAG 2.2 AA rules. Classification by business type using meta keywords + HTML structure. Scan on publicly accessible pages (homepage + 3 top-linked).
Web accessibility in Runet 2026 is crucial for ensuring compliance with WCAG 2.1 standards. Organizations should perform thorough WCAG audits to identify accessibility issues, focusing on areas such as keyboard navigation, screen reader compatibility, and color contrast ratios. Tools like Axe and Lighthouse can automate this process, enabling developers to achieve a minimum conformance level of AA. For example, ensuring all images have alt text is a key requirement.
To ensure compliance with WCAG 2.1 standards, a systematic approach to auditing web accessibility is essential. This section outlines the practical steps and tools necessary for a comprehensive WCAG audit.
WCAG 2.1 is divided into four principles: Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, and Robust (POUR). Each principle has specific criteria that web content must meet to be considered accessible.
Before beginning the audit, gather the following:
Start the audit with automated tools to identify common issues. For instance, using npm install -g axe-cli allows you to run accessibility tests directly from the command line. Here's a sample command:
axe --save This command scans the specified URL and saves the results in JSON format, which can then be analyzed for violations.
While automated tools are effective, manual testing is crucial for identifying issues that tools may miss. Here are key manual testing techniques:
As you identify accessibility issues, document your findings clearly. Use a structured format that includes:
After documenting issues, prioritize them based on impact and effort required for remediation. Focus on critical issues that affect user experience, such as:
Accessibility is not a one-time effort. Establish continuous monitoring processes by integrating accessibility checks into your development workflow. This can include:
By following these practices and leveraging both automated and manual testing methods, organizations can ensure that their web content is accessible to all users, as a significant percentage of sites currently face various accessibility challenges. For instance, many sites have issues such as missing alt text on images, weak color contrast, and missing ARIA landmarks. Additionally, a notable portion of form inputs lack proper labels, and keyboard navigation is often broken. Addressing these issues is crucial for aligning with accessibility standards and enhancing overall user experience.
The tool checks HTTP security headers, SSL/TLS configuration, server info leaks, and protection against common attacks (XSS, clickjacking, MIME sniffing). A grade fromA to F shows overall security level.
Checking Content-Security-Policy, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, Referrer-Policy, and more.
TLS version, certificate expiry, chain of trust, HSTS support.
Finding exposed server versions, debug modes, open configs, and directories.
Detailed report explaining each issue with specific steps to fix it.
HTTP header audit
config verification
CSP & HSTS setup
compliance checks
Strict-Transport-Security.Server: Apache/2.4.52 helps attackers find exploits. Hide the version.DENY or SAMEORIGIN.nosniff, browsers may misinterpret file types (MIME sniffing).Content-Security-Policy-Report-Only, monitor violations, then enforce.Server, X-Powered-By, X-AspNet-Version from responses.Security check history and HTTP security header monitoring.
Sign up freeChrome DevTools → Lighthouse → Accessibility report. Or <a href="/en/security">Enterno Security Scanner</a> includes basic a11y checks (Pro: full axe-core).
WCAG 2.2 added 9 new success criteria (Oct 2023): focus appearance, dragging movements, target size, consistent help. Backwards-compatible with 2.1.
For gov sector — yes, often a prosecutor notifies the Ministry. Private business — rarely, but risk exists via Rospotrebnadzor (consumer protection).
1) alt on images. 2) Semantic HTML (nav/main/article instead of div). 3) aria-label on icon buttons. 4) Color contrast check via WebAIM. These 4 close ~60% of automated violations.
Free plan — 10 monitors, checks every 5 min, no card required. Upgrade for 1-minute interval and multi-region monitoring.