Skip to main content

Security report for dea.gov

United States Drug Enforcement Administration · Government · United States

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

70/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The United States Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) operates as a federal government agency focused on combating drug-related crime, providing education, prevention, and community outreach. The website serves as an authoritative source for drug enforcement information, resources, and public engagement. It targets a broad audience including law enforcement, parents, educators, and the general public. The DEA maintains a strong market position as a key federal agency under the U.S. Department of Justice. Technically, the website is built on Drupal 10 with a modern technology stack including Google Analytics, Tag Manager, and social media integrations. The site is mobile-optimized, accessible, and demonstrates good SEO practices. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforced and appropriate security headers, though explicit incident response contacts and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms could be improved. Overall, the site is professional, trustworthy, and compliant with privacy policies. The incomplete WHOIS data is a minor anomaly but is mitigated by the .gov domain status and consistent government branding. The site does not contain any adult or inappropriate content and is safe for general audiences.

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

5 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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

    • 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

  3. 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 SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching dea.gov

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
80
Security headers
30
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
58
Average
70

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

DEA is positioned as a critical government entity with a clear mission to enforce drug laws and educate the public. Its business model is non-commercial, focused on public safety and law enforcement. The agency leverages partnerships with other government sites and outreach programs to extend its impact. The website supports recruitment, public information dissemination, and community engagement, indicating a mature digital presence aligned with federal standards. The presence of multiple official social media channels and embedded content from trusted platforms enhances its outreach capabilities. The site’s content and structure reflect a well-organized government communication strategy with a focus on transparency and public service.

Security posture

The DEA website demonstrates a mature security posture with HTTPS, security headers, and no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data. The use of multiple tracking and analytics tools is balanced with privacy compliance and clear policies. However, the absence of a public incident response contact or security.txt file is a gap in vulnerability management transparency. The site’s security practices align with federal standards, likely incorporating NIST frameworks, but could benefit from enhanced public-facing security disclosures.

Recommendations

  1. Publish explicit incident response and abuse contact information to improve transparency and trust.
  2. Implement and publish a security.txt file to facilitate responsible vulnerability disclosure.
  3. Regularly review and audit third-party scripts and tracking pixels for privacy and security compliance.
  4. Enhance documentation of data retention policies related to analytics and tracking.
  5. Maintain and update accessibility and privacy policies to reflect evolving compliance requirements.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
United States Drug Enforcement Administration
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
United States Drug Enforcement Administration
Description
The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is a United States federal law enforcement agency tasked with combating criminal drug networks that cause harm, violence, overdoses, and poisonings. It employs approximately 10,000 personnel worldwide across domestic and foreign offices.
Key services
Law enforcement, Forensic sciences, Education and prevention, Community outreach, Public information and resources
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Drupal 10, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Font Awesome, jQuery, Modernizr, Pinterest Tag, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Orion Platform
Frameworks
Drupal CMS
Platforms
YouTube (embedded videos), Instagram (embedded feed)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
excellent
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of secure cookies (implied)
  • No vulnerable libraries detected
  • Secure forms with minimal data collection

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Digital Analytics Program (DAP), Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Pinterest Tag, Orion Platform
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
AppNexus (acdn.adnxs.com)
Tracking pixels
Pinterest Tag, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Orion Platform, Digital Analytics Program (dap.digitalgov.gov)
Marketing tools
Orion Platform
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Official U.S. government website with .gov domain
  2. Comprehensive drug enforcement and prevention content
  3. Multiple official social media channels linked
  4. Use of modern web technologies and analytics
  5. Secure HTTPS with good security practices
  6. Clear contact information including phone and email
  7. No signs of adult or inappropriate content
  8. No WAF or blocking detected
  9. WHOIS data incomplete but domain is .gov indicating high trust
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses Drupal 10 CMS, a robust and secure platform suitable for government sites. It integrates modern JavaScript libraries and analytics tools, including Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, and LinkedIn Insight Tag. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, with good SEO metadata and structured navigation. Performance is moderate, likely due to the inclusion of multiple external scripts and embedded content. Hosting details are not explicitly found, but the site uses a .gov domain indicating government hosting infrastructure. Technical risks are minimal, with opportunities for modernization in analytics transparency and incident response mechanisms.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 75/100Medium22 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with dea.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 dea.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.