Fairfax County Economic Development Authority · Government · United States
Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 2 other checks.
Fairfax County Economic Development Authority (FCEDA) operates as a government entity focused on promoting business growth and economic development in the Fairfax NOVA region. The website serves as a comprehensive portal offering resources, insights, and support for businesses looking to invest, relocate, or expand in Northern Virginia. FCEDA positions itself as a key regional economic development authority with a strong emphasis on sectors such as technology, government contracting, real estate, and transportation. The site highlights major employers, workforce demographics, capital investment incentives, and business mentoring programs, targeting business leaders, entrepreneurs, and investors. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with modern frameworks like Vue.js and uses advanced tools such as Google Tag Manager and Osano for consent management. The site is well-optimized for SEO, mobile-friendly, and incorporates structured data for enhanced search engine visibility. Performance is moderate with good accessibility features, reflecting a mature digital infrastructure. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and implements cookie consent mechanisms, but lacks some advanced security headers like Content-Security-Policy. The domain is long-established and registered with a reputable registrar, showing strong legitimacy and domain security practices. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. Overall, the website presents a professional, trustworthy, and well-maintained digital presence for FCEDA, supporting its mission to attract and support businesses in the Fairfax NOVA region. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security headers, enabling DNSSEC, and publishing explicit security and incident response policies to further strengthen trust and compliance.
Scanned
NIS2 Art. 21(2)
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.
9 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.
SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.
Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing
What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately
SPF helps prevent email spoofing
What to do: Add SPF record: "v=spf1 include:_spf.yourmailprovider.com ~all"
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.
Forces HTTPS connections
What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"
Prevents clickjacking attacks
What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"
Controls resources the browser is allowed to load
What to do: Implement a Content-Security-Policy appropriate for your application
These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.
GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage
What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes
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
This scan found 28 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.
€25per month
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.
€39.90one-time
Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.
Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.
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
Not counted
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.
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
Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.
Leaked records that mention fairfaxcountyeda.org, from OffSeq Breach.
No leaked records found
Breach holds no records for fairfaxcountyeda.org right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.
Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.
Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.
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
Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.
Reviews of this site
Share your experience with fairfaxcountyeda.org. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.
Community rating
No published reviews yet. Be the first to review fairfaxcountyeda.org.