Skip to main content

Security report for bodc.ac.uk

British Oceanographic Data Centre · Government · United Kingdom

Low risk. 2 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

81/100

Risk levelLow

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

The British Oceanographic Data Centre (BODC) operates as the UK's national facility for preserving and distributing oceanographic and marine data. Affiliated with the National Oceanography Centre and the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), BODC serves a specialized audience of marine scientists, researchers, and governmental agencies. The website offers extensive resources including data inventories, submission guidelines, and hosted data systems, positioning BODC as a key player in marine data management within the UK and internationally. Technically, the website employs a modern yet straightforward technology stack including jQuery, Modernizr, Google Analytics, and Matomo for analytics, alongside social sharing tools like AddThis. The site is mobile-optimized with good accessibility and SEO practices, though some legacy scripts like Google+ API remain. Performance is moderate, with room for optimization. Security is robust with HTTPS enforced, but lacks explicit security headers and incident response information. From a security and compliance perspective, the site demonstrates good practices with no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data. Privacy and cookie policies are present and GDPR compliance is indicated, though no active cookie consent mechanism is detected. WHOIS data is unavailable, likely due to privacy protection, but the site's affiliation and certifications such as CoreTrustSeal support its legitimacy. Overall, the site is professional, trustworthy, and well-suited for its scientific and governmental audience.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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

2 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

  2. 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

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

Keep watching bodc.ac.uk

This scan found 17 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
72
Security headers
80
Email security
98
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
81

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

BODC holds a strong market position as the UK's authoritative marine data center, supported by government and research institutions. Its business model focuses on data stewardship, providing access to over 130,000 unique datasets and supporting marine research and environmental monitoring. The organization benefits from partnerships with major marine data networks and certification bodies, enhancing credibility. The target customers include academic researchers, environmental agencies, and policy makers. The website's comprehensive resources and clear navigation indicate a mature digital presence, though some modernization opportunities exist in technology and security disclosures.

Security posture

The security posture of the BODC website is solid, with HTTPS enforced and no visible sensitive data leaks. The use of reputable analytics platforms and absence of vulnerable libraries indicate good security hygiene. However, the lack of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and absence of published incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies represent gaps. No security contact emails or security.txt files were found, which could improve transparency and incident handling readiness. Overall, the site is secure but could enhance its security maturity by adopting additional best practices and formal policies.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance browser security.
  2. Add a cookie consent mechanism to comply fully with GDPR and improve user privacy transparency.
  3. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to improve trust and preparedness.
  4. Remove or update deprecated scripts such as the Google+ API to reduce technical debt and potential vulnerabilities.
  5. Consider providing a security.txt file and vulnerability disclosure guidelines to facilitate responsible reporting.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
British Oceanographic Data Centre
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
British Oceanographic Data Centre
Description
The British Oceanographic Data Centre (BODC) is a national facility for preserving and distributing oceanographic and marine data. Staff have direct experience of marine data collection and analysis and they work alongside information technology specialists to ensure that the biological, chemical, physical and geophysical data handled are documented and stored for current and future use.
Key services
Marine data archiving, Data distribution, Data submission guidance, Hosted data systems, Data products and software, Vocabulary and metadata services
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Modernizr, Google Analytics, Matomo Analytics, AddThis social sharing, Google+ API (deprecated but present), FontAwesome icons
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of secure analytics scripts
  • No visible vulnerable libraries

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Matomo
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Matomo, AddThis
Marketing tools
AddThis social sharing
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. WHOIS data is missing or unavailable, likely due to privacy protection or registry restrictions.
  3. The site is well-structured with comprehensive resources and clear navigation.
  4. Security headers are not explicitly visible in the HTML but HTTPS is enforced.
  5. Privacy and cookie policies are present but cookie consent mechanism is not detected.
  6. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is found.
  7. The site uses multiple analytics tools including Google Analytics and Matomo.
  8. Content is safe and targeted at scientific and governmental audiences.
  9. Branding is consistent with National Oceanography Centre affiliation.
  10. External links include reputable scientific and governmental partner domains.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a combination of classic web technologies such as jQuery and Modernizr, alongside modern analytics tools like Google Analytics and Matomo. The site is mobile responsive and accessible with good SEO metadata and structured navigation. However, some legacy elements like Google+ API scripts remain, suggesting partial modernization. Performance is moderate, with potential improvements in script optimization and caching. The absence of a detected CMS suggests a custom or static site architecture. Hosting details are not explicit, but the site uses HTTPS with a valid certificate. Overall, the technical implementation supports the site's mission but could benefit from modernization and enhanced security configurations.
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 bodc.ac.uk. 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 bodc.ac.uk.

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.