Skip to main content

Security report for blm.gov

Bureau of Land Management · Government · United States

High risk. 16 critical or high findings in Network security, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

49/100

Risk levelHigh

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

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is a U.S. government agency under the Department of the Interior responsible for managing vast public lands and natural resources. The website provides comprehensive information about BLM's mission, programs, and services including energy and minerals management, recreation, conservation, and law enforcement. The site targets a broad audience including the general public, outdoor enthusiasts, and government stakeholders. It serves as an authoritative source for public land information and engagement. Technically, the website is built on Drupal 10 CMS and integrates modern analytics and tracking tools such as Google Analytics and DigitalGov Analytics. The site demonstrates good mobile optimization, accessibility compliance, and SEO practices. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforced and privacy protections in place, although explicit security headers and incident response information could be improved. Overall, the website is professional, trustworthy, and well-maintained, reflecting the standards expected of a federal government domain. The incomplete WHOIS data is typical for .gov domains and does not detract from the site's legitimacy. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security header transparency, implementing cookie consent mechanisms, and publishing detailed security policies to further strengthen trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
58/ 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

16 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: Telnet

      Port 23 (Telnet) is publicly accessible - Telnet - Unencrypted remote access

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to Telnet using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: SMB

      Port 445 (SMB) is publicly accessible - SMB - Windows file sharing, high risk

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to SMB using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MSSQL

      Port 1433 (MSSQL) is publicly accessible - MSSQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MSSQL using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: Oracle

      Port 1521 (Oracle) is publicly accessible - Oracle - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to Oracle using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

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

Keep watching blm.gov

This scan found 31 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. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

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
75
Security headers
70
Email security
80
DNS health
80
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
58
Average
61
After the cap
49

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 · found on this site
  • 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

BLM holds a critical position in managing public lands and natural resources in the United States, supporting energy production, recreation, conservation, and cultural resource management. Its business model is that of a government agency providing public services rather than commercial offerings. The website supports transparency and public engagement through news, events, and resource access. The agency benefits from strong brand recognition and trust as a federal entity. Growth indicators include active program updates and public input mechanisms. Partnerships with other government entities and public stakeholders are evident through linked domains and content. The agency's operations are extensive and complex, requiring robust digital infrastructure and compliance with federal standards. The website reflects this with comprehensive content and integration of government analytics and accessibility tools.

Security posture

The website exhibits a mature security posture with mandatory HTTPS, anonymized IP tracking in analytics, and accessibility features that align with federal compliance requirements. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the content. However, explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options are not visibly confirmed and should be audited. The absence of a published incident response or security policy page is a gap in transparency. The vulnerability disclosure policy is present, but a security.txt file is not detected. Overall, the site meets many best practices but could enhance its security documentation and header implementation to improve defense-in-depth and stakeholder confidence.

Recommendations

  1. Publish and enforce comprehensive security headers including CSP, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  2. Implement a cookie consent banner/mechanism to comply with privacy regulations and improve user transparency.
  3. Create and publish detailed security and incident response policies accessible from the website footer or about sections.
  4. Add a security.txt file at the root domain to facilitate responsible vulnerability disclosure.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and analytics tools to ensure no vulnerable libraries or privacy issues.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Bureau of Land Management
Description
The Bureau of Land Management's mission is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations.
Key services
Public land management, Energy and minerals management, Recreation and visitor services, Wild horse and burro management, Law enforcement on public lands, Environmental cleanup and conservation
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Drupal 10, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, SiteImprove Analytics, DigitalGov Analytics, Universal-Federated-Analytics
Frameworks
Drupal CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Anonymize IP in Google Analytics
  • Accessibility tools for compliance
  • Official .gov domain usage

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, DigitalGov Analytics, SiteImprove Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
SiteImprove Analytics, DigitalGov Analytics
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
excellent
User experience
excellent
Content relevance
excellent
Navigation
excellent
Professionalism
excellent
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Official U.S. government website with .gov TLD
  2. Comprehensive content about public land management and services
  3. Strong accessibility and privacy compliance indicators
  4. No signs of malicious or suspicious content
  5. Uses modern CMS and analytics tools
  6. WHOIS data incomplete but consistent with government domain practices
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses Drupal 10 CMS, a modern and secure content management system suitable for government websites. It integrates Google Analytics and DigitalGov analytics for user tracking and performance monitoring. The site is mobile optimized and includes accessibility tools such as font size toggles and dyslexia-friendly color schemes, indicating a commitment to inclusivity. Performance is moderate with asynchronous loading of scripts and lazy loading of images. The site uses standard meta tags and Open Graph tags for SEO and social media sharing. Hosting details are not explicit but likely government-managed. Technical debt appears low with modern frameworks and libraries in use. Opportunities exist to enhance security headers and cookie management for compliance and security hardening.
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 blm.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 blm.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.