Skip to main content

Security report for coloradocollege.edu

Colorado College · Education · United States

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS and GDPR outside view.

Security score

75/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Colorado College is a selective liberal arts college in the United States, known for its innovative Block Plan academic model that allows students to focus on one course at a time. The institution targets students, faculty, alumni, and families, providing a comprehensive educational experience with strong community engagement and campus life. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand image with excellent content quality and user experience. Technically, the website employs modern technologies including Bootstrap 5, FontAwesome Pro, Google Tag Manager, and multiple analytics and tracking pixels. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, though performance is moderate. Security posture is generally good with HTTPS enforced, but lacks visible security headers and a cookie consent mechanism, which are areas for improvement. The absence of WHOIS data limits domain registration trust analysis, but the website's content and external references strongly support its legitimacy. The site extensively uses third-party tracking services, indicating a high level of user data collection. Overall, the website is professional, secure, and credible, with minor gaps in privacy compliance and security best practices.

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

3 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

  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 coloradocollege.edu

This scan found 21 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
75
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
75

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

Colorado College holds a strong market position as a leading liberal arts college with a unique academic calendar (Block Plan) that differentiates it from competitors. Its business model focuses on undergraduate education with a selective admission process. The college's revenue streams likely include tuition, donations, and grants. The target customer segments are prospective students and their families, faculty, and alumni. The institution maintains partnerships with various service providers for campus activities, dining, and digital services. Growth indicators include active event calendars and scholarship programs. The website's ecosystem includes related domains for athletics, arts, and alumni engagement, supporting a comprehensive student and community experience.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with HTTPS enforced and no visible exposure of sensitive data. However, the lack of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options reduces protection against common web attacks. The absence of a published incident response or vulnerability disclosure policy limits transparency and readiness communication. Extensive use of third-party tracking scripts increases the attack surface and privacy risks. No critical vulnerabilities or malware indicators were detected. Compliance with privacy regulations is partial, with a privacy policy present but no cookie consent mechanism. Overall, the security posture is good but could be enhanced by implementing recommended headers, consent mechanisms, and incident response disclosures.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  2. Add a visible cookie consent banner and detailed cookie policy to improve privacy compliance.
  3. Publish an incident response and vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to enhance transparency and trust.
  4. Regularly audit and minimize third-party tracking scripts to reduce privacy risks and improve performance.
  5. Conduct periodic WHOIS and domain registration audits to ensure domain legitimacy and update records as needed.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Colorado College
Description
Colorado College, home to the creative and innovative Block Plan, is one of the nation’s leading liberal arts colleges, with a commitment to a creative and equity-driven experience that prepares our students for lifelong learning and leadership.
Key services
Undergraduate education, Block Plan academic scheduling, Campus life and student services, Admissions and financial aid, Research opportunities, Community engagement
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap 5, FontAwesome Pro 5.15.1, Typekit Fonts, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, TikTok Pixel, Snapchat Pixel, Viant Universal Pixel, Silktide Analytics
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of Google Tag Manager for controlled script loading

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Silktide Analytics, TikTok Analytics, Snapchat Analytics, Viant Universal Pixel
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
Viant
Tracking pixels
TikTok Pixel, Snapchat Pixel, Viant Universal Pixel, Silktide Analytics
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and no blocking detected.
  2. Strong branding and consistent design aligned with an educational institution.
  3. Multiple official social media and external trusted links present.
  4. No visible security headers detected in HTML source; recommend header audit.
  5. No cookie consent banner or explicit cookie policy found; potential compliance gap.
  6. WHOIS data unavailable, limiting domain registration trust analysis.
  7. Use of multiple third-party analytics and tracking pixels indicates extensive user tracking.
  8. No visible contact emails in HTML; contact primarily via phone and contact forms.
  9. No explicit incident response or security policy pages found.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern and widely adopted technology stack centered on Bootstrap 5 for responsive design, FontAwesome for icons, and Adobe Typekit for fonts. It integrates multiple analytics and marketing tools including Google Analytics, TikTok Pixel, Snapchat Pixel, and Viant Universal Pixel, managed via Google Tag Manager. The site is mobile-optimized with good accessibility features and SEO meta tags. Performance is moderate, likely impacted by multiple third-party scripts. No CMS or hosting provider is explicitly identified from the HTML content. The site uses video backgrounds and interactive hero sections, indicating a focus on user engagement and modern web design trends. Technical risks include potential privacy issues from extensive tracking and missing security headers.
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 coloradocollege.edu. 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 coloradocollege.edu.

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.