Skip to main content

Security report for ggu.edu

Golden Gate University · Education · United States

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

55/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Golden Gate University is a well-established private nonprofit university founded in 1901, offering a wide range of online and hybrid degree programs tailored for working professionals. The university leverages a modern WordPress-based digital infrastructure with advanced analytics and marketing tools, including Google Tag Manager, New Relic, and Salesforce embedded chat, to provide a seamless user experience. The website demonstrates excellent design quality, clear navigation, and comprehensive content relevant to its target audience. Security posture is strong with HTTPS and best practices in place, though explicit security policies and cookie consent mechanisms are absent. Overall, the site reflects a mature digital presence aligned with the institution's long-standing reputation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
28/ 100 · High
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. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

    • 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

  2. 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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  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 ggu.edu

This scan found 20 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
0
Security headers
40
Email security
75
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
28
Average
55

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

GGU positions itself as a career-focused educational institution serving adult learners and professionals seeking flexible degree options. Its market position is reinforced by over 120 years of history and a strong presence in San Francisco's financial district. The business model centers on delivering accessible education through online and hybrid formats, supported by robust student services and international partnerships. The university's digital ecosystem integrates multiple marketing and analytics platforms to optimize outreach and engagement. Strategic partnerships with Salesforce and other service providers enhance customer support and operational efficiency.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS with a good SSL configuration and uses several security best practices such as asynchronous loading of scripts and honeypot fields in forms to mitigate spam. However, it lacks explicit security headers like X-Frame-Options and does not publicly disclose a security policy or incident response contacts. The absence of a cookie consent mechanism may pose compliance risks under privacy regulations. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analyzed content. The overall security maturity is solid but could be improved by formalizing policies and enhancing privacy compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a visible cookie consent banner to comply with privacy laws and improve user trust.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response contact information to enhance transparency.
  3. Add security headers such as X-Frame-Options and X-Content-Type-Options to strengthen defense-in-depth.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
  5. Consider establishing a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Golden Gate University
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Golden Gate University
Description
Founded in 1901, Golden Gate University is a private, nonprofit university offering 60+ online and hybrid degrees for working professionals. It provides flexible undergraduate, graduate, and certificate programs designed for working adults, with a focus on career-oriented education in business, law, accounting, taxation, technology, and more.
Key services
Undergraduate degrees, Graduate degrees, Certificate programs, Online and hybrid learning, Student resources and support
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Gravity Forms, Yoast SEO, Google Tag Manager, New Relic Browser, FontAwesome, jQuery, Salesforce Embedded Service Chat, Smart Phone Field for Gravity Forms
Frameworks
Yoast SEO, Gravity Forms
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of security and analytics scripts loaded asynchronously
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of honeypot field in forms to prevent spam

Analytics and tracking

Services
New Relic Browser, Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager), Facebook Analytics, TikTok Analytics, Bing Ads Analytics, Reddit Analytics, LinkedIn Analytics, Attribution App
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
ClickCease
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, TikTok Pixel, Bing Ads, Reddit Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Google Ads
Marketing tools
Attribution App
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and well-structured.
  2. Comprehensive educational offerings with clear navigation.
  3. Strong presence of tracking and marketing technologies.
  4. Contact information and forms are clearly presented.
  5. No signs of blocking or WAF interference.
  6. No explicit cookie consent mechanism detected.
  7. No visible security or incident response policies.
  8. Use of modern web technologies and analytics tools.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress with a modern theme and uses Gravity Forms for data collection. It integrates multiple analytics and marketing tools including Google Tag Manager, New Relic Browser, Facebook Pixel, TikTok Pixel, and Salesforce Embedded Service Chat. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and accessibility features. Performance is moderate with asynchronous script loading and CDN usage for assets. The technical stack is mature and well-maintained, supporting a professional and user-friendly online presence. Opportunities exist to enhance security headers and privacy compliance 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

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with ggu.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 ggu.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.