Skip to main content

Security report for eac.gov

U.S. Election Assistance Commission · Government · United States

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

Security score

75/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) is a federal government agency dedicated to improving election administration and supporting voter participation across the United States. It provides a wide range of resources including election management guidelines, certification of voting systems, research reports, and grants management. The website serves election officials, voters, researchers, and government entities with authoritative and comprehensive content. Technically, the site is built on Drupal 10 with modern JavaScript libraries and is optimized for accessibility and mobile use. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforced and no visible vulnerabilities, though some security headers could be added for enhanced protection. Privacy compliance is basic with a clear privacy policy but lacking a cookie consent mechanism. Overall, the site is professional, trustworthy, and well-maintained, reflecting its role as an official government resource.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of eac.gov. View the latest report

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

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 Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1
    • 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 eac.gov

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
75
Security headers
50
Email security
85
DNS health
85
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

The EAC holds a unique market position as the sole federal agency focused on election administration, providing essential services and resources to state and local election officials and voters. Its business model is government-funded and centered on regulatory, certification, and educational functions. The agency maintains a strong partnership ecosystem through social media and official government portals. The website's content and structure indicate a mature digital presence with consistent branding and high-quality information delivery. Growth indicators include active event scheduling and updated research publications. The EAC's operations are transparent and aligned with federal government standards.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with mandatory HTTPS, secure external linking practices, and no exposed sensitive data. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options suggests room for improvement. There is no public vulnerability disclosure or incident response contact information, which are recommended best practices for transparency and rapid response. The site does not appear to use a WAF or present any blocking challenges, indicating open accessibility. Overall, the security measures are appropriate for a government informational site but could be enhanced to meet higher standards.

Recommendations

  1. Implement security headers like Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to strengthen protection against common web attacks.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner or mechanism to comply with privacy regulations and improve user transparency.
  3. Publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Provide clear incident response contact information, such as a security@ or abuse@ email address, to improve trust and responsiveness.
  5. Regularly review and audit third-party scripts and libraries to ensure no vulnerabilities are introduced.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
U.S. Election Assistance Commission
Description
The U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) is an independent, bipartisan commission whose mission is to help election officials improve the administration of elections and help Americans participate in the voting process. The EAC works to protect election equipment, support election officials, serve voters, and help make elections safe, secure, accurate, and accessible.
Key services
Election Management Guidelines, Election Official Toolkits, Voting System Testing & Certification, Research and Data Reports, Grants Management, Voter Resources
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Drupal 10, jQuery, Chosen.js, Flexslider, Glightbox, Google Tag Manager
Frameworks
Drupal CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
excellent
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of secure external links with noreferrer and nofollow
  • No visible vulnerable libraries

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Marketing tools
AddToAny social sharing
Transparency
basic

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 TLD
  2. Comprehensive election assistance resources for officials and voters
  3. Modern, accessible, and mobile-optimized design
  4. No signs of malicious or suspicious content
  5. Strong social media presence on official platforms
  6. No visible privacy or cookie consent banner
  7. WHOIS data unavailable due to .gov domain registry policies
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Drupal 10 CMS, leveraging modern JavaScript libraries such as jQuery, Chosen.js for enhanced select inputs, Flexslider for carousels, and Glightbox for media display. Google Tag Manager is used for analytics and tracking. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, following US Web Design System (USWDS) standards. Performance is moderate with room for optimization in loading speed. The site uses HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate, ensuring secure communications. No hosting provider information was detected from the HTML content. The technical stack is modern and well-maintained, supporting a professional and user-friendly experience.
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. 73/100Medium27 findingsView report
  2. 73/100Medium27 findingsView report
  3. 73/100Medium21 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with eac.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 eac.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.