Skip to main content

Security report for cisc.gov.au

Department of Home Affairs · Government · Australia

Low risk. 2 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view.

Security score

77/100

Risk levelLow

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

The Critical Infrastructure Security Centre (CISC) website serves as an authoritative Australian government portal under the Department of Home Affairs, focusing on supporting critical infrastructure owners and operators to understand risks and comply with regulatory requirements. The site positions itself as a key resource for various sectors including energy, transport, telecommunications, and finance, providing risk assessments, regulatory guidance, and partnership opportunities. The content is well-structured and professionally presented, targeting industry stakeholders and government partners.

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

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 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 cisc.gov.au

This scan found 18 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
85
Security headers
65
Email security
70
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
77

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

CISC operates as a government entity with a clear mandate to enhance Australia's critical infrastructure security. Its business model revolves around regulatory oversight, collaboration, and support services rather than commercial revenue generation. The website reflects a mature digital presence with integration into the broader Department of Home Affairs ecosystem, leveraging official branding and trusted government domains. The partnership ecosystem includes national security agencies and emergency management bodies, reinforcing its authoritative market position.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a strong security posture with enforced HTTPS, comprehensive security headers, and secure form handling. However, it lacks a dedicated security policy page, incident response contact details, and a vulnerability disclosure program, which are recommended best practices for transparency and stakeholder trust. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the content. The use of third-party analytics is standard but should be regularly reviewed for security and privacy compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement an explicit cookie consent banner to comply with privacy best practices.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response contact information to enhance transparency.
  3. Establish a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Provide direct contact emails or phone numbers for security incidents to improve incident response readiness.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and analytics tools to mitigate potential security risks.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Department of Home Affairs
Description
The Critical Infrastructure Security Centre drives an all-hazards critical infrastructure regime in partnership with governments, industry and community.
Key services
Risk assessments, Regulatory compliance support, Partnership and collaboration, Organisational resilience, Background checking services, Accreditation and training
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Microsoft SharePoint, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Slick Carousel, JavaScript, CSS
Frameworks
SharePoint Framework
Platforms
Microsoft SharePoint Online
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of security headers
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure forms with anti-forgery tokens

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a government portal for the Critical Infrastructure Security Centre under the Australian Department of Home Affairs.
  2. Content is comprehensive and targeted at critical infrastructure stakeholders in Australia.
  3. Uses Microsoft SharePoint as CMS and integrates Google Analytics and Tag Manager for analytics.
  4. No WHOIS detailed data available due to registrar policy, but domain appears legitimate.
  5. No signs of WAF blocking or security challenges.
  6. No direct email addresses or phone numbers found; contact is via a contact form.
  7. Privacy and cookie policies are present but lack explicit consent mechanisms.
  8. Security headers and HTTPS are properly implemented.
  9. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found.
  10. Social media presence includes Twitter, LinkedIn, and Instagram official accounts.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Microsoft SharePoint, a robust enterprise CMS platform, and integrates modern JavaScript libraries such as Slick Carousel for UI components. It uses Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics for tracking, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. The site is hosted on government infrastructure, likely leveraging Microsoft Azure or similar cloud services. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and accessibility features. The technical implementation aligns with government standards but could benefit from enhanced privacy and security transparency features.
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 cisc.gov.au. 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 cisc.gov.au.

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.