Skip to main content

Security report for cpft.nhs.uk

Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust · Healthcare · United Kingdom

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

79/100

Risk levelLow

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

Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust (CPFT) is a large healthcare provider focused on delivering mental health, community, and specialist services to the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough region in the UK. The Trust is a proud teaching partner of the University of Cambridge and engages in clinical research and innovation to improve patient outcomes. Their website offers comprehensive information for patients, carers, professionals, and the community, emphasizing accessibility and support. The Trust also operates a charity and volunteer programs to enhance community involvement. Technically, the website is built on VerseOne CMS v5 and integrates modern tools such as Google Tag Manager for analytics and ReadSpeaker for accessibility. The site is mobile-optimized, well-structured, and includes multilingual support via GTranslate. Performance is moderate with good SEO and accessibility features, reflecting a mature digital presence. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and avoids exposing sensitive data. However, explicit security headers are not detected, and there is no public incident response or vulnerability disclosure information. The site uses secure forms and maintains privacy and cookie policies compliant with GDPR. The WHOIS data is unavailable due to querying a subdomain, but the domain usage and content strongly indicate legitimacy as an NHS Trust site. Overall, CPFT's website demonstrates a high level of professionalism, trustworthiness, and user-centric design. Strategic improvements in security headers and transparency around security policies would further enhance their security posture and user trust.

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

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 Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  3. 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';…

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

Keep watching cpft.nhs.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
59
Security headers
65
Email security
98
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
79

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

CPFT holds a strong position as a regional NHS Foundation Trust delivering essential healthcare services, particularly in mental health and community care. Their partnership with the University of Cambridge enhances their research capabilities and reputation. The Trust's business model is public healthcare provision funded by the NHS, with additional community engagement through charity and volunteer programs. Their target audience includes patients, carers, healthcare professionals, and community stakeholders. The website reflects a well-established organization with a large operational scale and a focus on quality care, innovation, and inclusivity. Partnerships with other healthcare and community organizations strengthen their ecosystem and service delivery.

Security posture

The website exhibits a solid security foundation with HTTPS enforced and no visible exposure of sensitive information. The use of secure forms and privacy-compliant policies indicates good data protection practices. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options suggests room for improvement. There is no publicly available incident response or vulnerability disclosure information, which could be enhanced to improve transparency and readiness. The WHOIS data limitation does not impact the security posture but highlights the need for clear domain registration information. Overall, the security maturity is good but could benefit from additional hardening and policy disclosures.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce security headers including CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection to mitigate common web vulnerabilities.
  2. Publish an incident response plan and vulnerability disclosure policy to enhance transparency and user trust.
  3. Provide direct security contact information such as a security@ or abuse@ email address for reporting issues.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and libraries to avoid vulnerabilities.
  5. Continue enhancing accessibility and privacy features to maintain compliance and user satisfaction.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust
Description
Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust improves the health and wellbeing of the people they care for, their staff and members.
Key services
Mental health services, Community health services, Specialist services, Research and clinical innovation, Carer support, Volunteering and charity activities
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
VerseOne CMS v5, Google Tag Manager, ReadSpeaker webReader, jQuery (implied by bxSlider usage), GTranslate widget
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
excellent
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure forms with POST method
  • Accessibility and privacy controls

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager)
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Marketing tools
GTranslate
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professionally maintained NHS Trust site with comprehensive service information.
  2. Strong focus on accessibility and user support.
  3. Multiple internal and external links to NHS and partner organizations.
  4. No signs of phishing, malware, or suspicious content.
  5. WHOIS data unavailable due to querying subdomain; no impact on site legitimacy.
  6. Use of modern CMS and third-party services for accessibility and translation.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is powered by VerseOne CMS v5, a specialized content management system, and integrates several third-party services such as Google Tag Manager for analytics and ReadSpeaker for accessibility. The site uses modern HTML5 and CSS3 standards with responsive design techniques ensuring good mobile optimization. The presence of multilingual support via GTranslate indicates a focus on inclusivity. Performance is moderate, likely influenced by the use of multiple scripts and image-heavy slideshows. There is no explicit hosting provider identified, but the use of NHS-related domains and services suggests hosting within NHS or trusted UK infrastructure. Technical debt appears low with opportunities to improve security headers and streamline third-party dependencies.
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 cpft.nhs.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 cpft.nhs.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.