Skip to main content

Security report for challenge.gov

Challenge.gov · Government · United States

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

81/100

Risk levelLow

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

Challenge.gov is an official U.S. government platform that facilitates prize challenges and competitions sponsored by federal agencies to foster innovation and problem-solving among public citizens and entities. The website serves as a centralized hub for discovering active challenges, accessing resources for innovators and federal innovation managers, and staying informed through events and newsletters. It is affiliated with the General Services Administration (GSA) and uses the trusted .gov domain, reinforcing its legitimacy and government authority. Technically, the site employs modern web technologies including the U.S. Web Design System (USWDS), React for dynamic content, and integrates Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager for performance and user behavior tracking. The site is hosted likely on government infrastructure or AWS, delivering fast performance with excellent mobile optimization and accessibility compliance. The design is professional, consistent, and user-friendly, supporting a broad audience including innovators and federal managers. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS with strong SSL configuration and anonymizes user IPs in analytics to enhance privacy. While explicit security headers are not fully confirmed, the site follows best practices typical of government websites. However, it lacks a visible cookie consent mechanism and a published vulnerability disclosure policy, which are areas for improvement. WHOIS data is incomplete, which is common for .gov domains, but the overall trustworthiness remains high due to official branding and content. Overall, Challenge.gov presents a secure, professional, and authoritative platform that effectively supports federal innovation challenges. Strategic recommendations include enhancing privacy compliance with cookie consent, publishing security policies, and confirming security headers 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

3 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 Content-Security-Policy header

      Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

      What to do: Implement a Content-Security-Policy appropriate for your application

      • ASVS V3.4.3
      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Content-Security-Policy: default-src 'self'; form-action 'self'; base-uri 'self'; object-src 'none';…

  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

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

Keep watching challenge.gov

This scan found 15 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
95
Security headers
55
Email security
98
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
58
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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention challenge.gov, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
55
Employees
0
Customers
55
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
22%

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for challenge.gov.

Select it in the checkout above.

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

Challenge.gov occupies a unique market position as the official U.S. federal government platform for prize competitions, enabling agencies to crowdsource innovative solutions from the public. Its business model is service-oriented, focusing on facilitating innovation through competitions rather than direct revenue generation. The platform targets public innovators, federal innovation managers, and agencies, providing resources, event information, and challenge listings. The site benefits from strong government backing (GSA) and a broad partnership ecosystem including NASA, Department of Defense, and Health and Human Services. Growth indicators include active challenge listings and engagement channels such as newsletters and social media. The platform's competitive advantage lies in its official status, trusted domain, and comprehensive challenge management capabilities.

Security posture

The security posture of Challenge.gov is robust, leveraging HTTPS with enforced SSL and anonymized IP tracking in analytics to protect user data. The site uses secure forms and does not expose sensitive information in its HTML content. However, the absence of explicit security headers like X-Frame-Options and X-Content-Type-Options, and lack of a published vulnerability disclosure or incident response contact, represent gaps in transparency and defense-in-depth. Privacy compliance is partial, with no visible cookie consent banner, which may affect GDPR and other privacy regulations. The WHOIS data is limited but typical for government domains, reducing risk of domain spoofing. Overall, the site demonstrates a mature security posture suitable for a government platform but could improve in privacy and disclosure practices.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and display a cookie consent banner to improve privacy compliance and user transparency.
  2. Publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to enhance security transparency and encourage responsible reporting.
  3. Add explicit security headers such as X-Frame-Options and X-Content-Type-Options to strengthen protection against common web attacks.
  4. Provide clear incident response contact information to facilitate timely reporting and handling of security incidents.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and dependencies to mitigate risks from vulnerable libraries or tracking services.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Challenge.gov
Description
Challenge.gov is the official government website supporting prize challenges and prize competitions sponsored by the US federal government. Federal agencies provide prize awards to public citizens and entities who solve problems and develop innovations.
Key services
Hosting federal prize challenges, Providing resources for innovators and managers, Event hosting and information dissemination
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, jQuery, USWDS (U.S. Web Design System), React (implied by react app container), AWS S3 (for challenge images), Digital Analytics Program (DAP)
Frameworks
USWDS
Platforms
AWS (S3 for images), Google Analytics platform
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
excellent
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Anonymized IP in Google Analytics
  • Secure forms with HTTPS
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of official government domain (.gov)

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Digital Analytics Program (DAP)
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Official US government website with .gov domain
  2. Comprehensive prize challenge platform for federal agencies
  3. Strong branding and consistent design using USWDS
  4. Good mobile and accessibility compliance
  5. No signs of malicious or suspicious content
  6. No explicit privacy cookie consent banner found
  7. WHOIS data is incomplete but typical for government domains
  8. Multiple social media and external official government links present
  9. No WAF or blocking detected, full content accessible
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern web technologies including React for dynamic content rendering and the U.S. Web Design System (USWDS) for consistent government styling. It integrates Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager for analytics and tracking, and hosts media assets on AWS S3. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, with fast loading times and proper meta tags for SEO. The HTML is valid and well-structured, supporting good user experience and search engine visibility. Technical risks are minimal but include reliance on third-party scripts and the need for enhanced security headers. The infrastructure appears stable and scalable, suitable for a high-traffic government platform.
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 challenge.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 challenge.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.