Skip to main content

Security report for bismarcknd.gov

Government · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

0–100, higher is better. How it is calculated

The website www.bismarcknd.gov is a government domain representing the city of Bismarck, North Dakota. However, the site content is currently inaccessible due to a Cloudflare security challenge page that requires bot verification. This prevents direct access to the website's content, metadata, and business information. The domain is protected by Cloudflare's security services, including Turnstile captcha, indicating a focus on mitigating malicious bot traffic. The WHOIS data is incomplete, lacking registrar and nameserver information, which limits the ability to fully verify domain registration legitimacy. The SSL configuration is present and appears well implemented, contributing positively to the security posture. Due to the content block, no privacy policies, contact information, or business details are accessible for analysis.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 100 · Medium
Checks completed
7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

  1. (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
  2. (b) Incident handling: One indicator
  3. (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
  4. (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
  5. (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
  6. (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
  7. (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
  8. (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
  9. (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
  10. (j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside

This scan rated NIS2 with an earlier keyword method that is no longer shown; rescan for the per-article view. Risk management, continuity, supply chain, training, MFA, management oversight (Art. 20) and incident reporting (Art. 23) need internal evidence, and Guard cannot tell whether NIS2 applies to this organisation.

GDPR is indicative only, based on publicly visible signals: Articles 7, 12, 13 and 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive. Not a certification or legal assessment.

Priority findings

5 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Security headers

    Security headers are instructions your web server sends to every visitor’s browser. Missing ones leave visitors more exposed to attacks such as clickjacking and injected scripts.

    • High

      Missing Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1

  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • High

      No Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  3. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching bismarcknd.gov

This scan found 23 issues across 6 checks. Monitoring re-runs those checks daily, emails you when something material changes and records each fix, so you can show progress.

Daily monitoring

Recommended

€25per month

  • TLS certificates and expiry
  • DNS records
  • SPF, DKIM and DMARC
  • Security headers
  • GDPR and NIS2 posture
  • Exposed services
  • Third-party trackers
  • Security score drift

Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.

Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. See sample alerts.

Full report

€39.90one-time

  • The complete analysis as a PDF you can cite
  • Email delivery with an unlock code
  • Lifetime access to this report

Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.

Results by check

Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.

How this score is calculated

The security score runs 0–100, higher is better. It is the plain average of the security checks that completed in this scan, each counted equally. A check that could not run is left out: it counts neither as a pass nor as a fail.

Counted in this score

SSL/TLS
37
Security headers
65
Email security
80
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
68

Not counted

  • NIS2 outside view: Re-weights evidence from the TLS, email, DNS, network and hygiene checks, so counting it would count that evidence twice. Shown on its own.
  • OffSeq Observations: An AI reading of the site, useful context but not reproducible evidence. Shown on its own.

Findings that cap the score at 49

Each of these is serious on its own, so while any is present the site cannot rate better than high risk, however good the other checks are.

  • The certificate is not trusted by browsers
  • The website is not served over HTTPS
  • A database, remote desktop, file-sharing or Telnet service is reachable from the internet
  • The page loads a script from a compromised source
  • The domain registration has expired
  • SPF authorises every server to send mail as the domain

Partial scans

When the site blocks Guard or most checks cannot run, the score covers only the checks that ran (usually DNS and email), is capped at 75 and is shown as partial, without a risk level.

Risk levels

  • Critical0–25
  • High26–49
  • Medium50–75
  • Low76–100

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Given the .gov TLD and domain name, the website likely serves as the official portal for the city government of Bismarck, providing municipal services and information to residents and visitors. The lack of accessible content prevents detailed insights into market positioning or service offerings. The use of Cloudflare suggests an emphasis on security and availability. No partner or subsidiary domains were identified. The business model is typical for government entities, focusing on public service rather than commercial revenue streams.

Security posture

The website benefits from Cloudflare's security infrastructure, including a strict Content-Security-Policy header and HTTPS enforcement. The presence of a bot challenge page indicates proactive defense against automated threats. However, the lack of visible security policies, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms reduces transparency. The incomplete WHOIS data is a concern for trust verification but may be due to government domain registration policies. Overall, the security posture is moderate but limited by the inability to assess the full site content.

Recommendations

  1. Work with Cloudflare to allow trusted scanners or partners to bypass the WAF challenge for security and compliance assessments.
  2. Publish clear privacy and cookie policies accessible without challenge to improve transparency and compliance.
  3. Provide visible contact information including security incident response contacts to enhance trust.
  4. Ensure WHOIS data is complete and accurate to support domain legitimacy verification.
  5. Consider implementing a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to demonstrate security maturity.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Cloudflare detected. Website is behind a Cloudflare security challenge page with Turnstile captcha, blocking direct content access. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Technology

Stack
Cloudflare Turnstile, JavaScript, HTML5, CSS3

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of Cloudflare security service
  • Content-Security-Policy header present

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
basic
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website content is blocked by Cloudflare WAF challenge page.
  2. No actual website content or metadata is accessible for analysis.
  3. No contact information, privacy policy, or terms of service found in accessible content.
  4. Security headers include a strict Content-Security-Policy.
  5. SSL/TLS is enabled and appears properly configured.
  6. No analytics or tracking scripts detected beyond Cloudflare challenge scripts.
  7. No external business or social media links found beyond Cloudflare references.
  8. WHOIS data is incomplete and lacks registrar and nameserver information.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses Cloudflare as a hosting and security provider, leveraging their Turnstile captcha for bot mitigation. The HTML content is minimal and serves only as a challenge page, with no visible CMS or additional frameworks detected. The site uses modern security headers such as Content-Security-Policy. Performance and mobile optimization cannot be assessed due to content blocking. The technical infrastructure is modern but limited in observable scope due to the WAF challenge.
Standards and sources

Reference chips under each finding point to the standard, regulation or specification the finding relates to. They are taken from the official datasets below and mapped conservatively: a finding with no defensible link shows none. NIS2 and GDPR references mark where a finding is relevant evidence, not a compliance verdict. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 binds digital infrastructure and digital service providers; for other entities it is the most detailed public reading of the Article 21 measures. WCAG, EN 301 549, European Accessibility Act and Web Accessibility Directive references name the requirement an automated accessibility rule relates to; they are not a conformance verdict.

Retrieved 2026-10-25

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with bismarcknd.gov. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.

Overall rating
Select a rating
4000 characters remaining

We’ll email you to confirm your review and keep your details private.

Community rating

No published reviews yet. Be the first to review bismarcknd.gov.

Feedback on this report

Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.

Overall report quality
Select a rating
2000 characters remaining

We only use your feedback to improve Guard reports. Contact details are never shared.