Skip to main content

Security report for gmu.edu

George Mason University · Education · United States

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

74/100

Risk levelMedium

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

George Mason University is a prominent public research university located in Virginia, recognized as a top 50 Public R1 Research University in the United States. It serves a diverse student body with a broad range of undergraduate, graduate, and professional education programs, emphasizing innovation and inclusivity. The university's website reflects its academic stature with comprehensive content, clear navigation, and a professional design that targets prospective students, faculty, and researchers. Technically, the website is built on Drupal 10, leveraging modern web technologies including Font Awesome and Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing. The site is well-optimized for mobile devices and accessibility, with strong SEO practices evident in meta tags and structured data. Security is robust, featuring HTTPS encryption and multiple security headers, alongside a cookie consent mechanism that supports GDPR compliance. While the WHOIS data is unavailable, which is common for .edu domains, the website's branding, content quality, and linked official subdomains strongly indicate legitimacy. No security vulnerabilities or sensitive data exposures were detected. However, the site lacks explicit security policy documentation and vulnerability disclosure information, which could enhance trust and transparency. Overall, George Mason University's digital presence is mature and secure, supporting its educational mission effectively. Strategic recommendations include publishing detailed security policies, establishing a vulnerability disclosure program, and providing clear data protection officer contacts to further strengthen compliance and user trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 100 · Low
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. 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

  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.

    • 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

  3. DNS health

    DNS sends visitors and email to the right servers. Misconfigured records can cause outages or let someone redirect your traffic.

    • High

      Weak SPF Policy

      SPF record has permissive policy allowing any server to send email

      What to do: Use -all or ~all qualifier for better email security

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

Keep watching gmu.edu

This scan found 22 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. See sample alerts.

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
62
Security headers
55
Email security
75
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
Average
74

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

George Mason University holds a strong market position as Virginia’s largest and most diverse public research university. Its competitive advantage lies in its inclusive admission policy and high graduation rates, positioning it as a leader in innovation within higher education. The university operates primarily in the education sector, offering a wide array of academic programs and research opportunities. Revenue streams likely include tuition, government funding, research grants, and donations. The target customer segments include domestic and international students, academic researchers, and professional learners. The university maintains partnerships with various internal subdomains and external educational platforms, enhancing its service ecosystem. Growth indicators include expansion of online education and research initiatives. The website reflects a well-established institution with consistent branding and professional content.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a strong security posture with enforced HTTPS, comprehensive security headers, and no visible exposure of sensitive information. The implementation of a cookie consent banner indicates attention to privacy regulations such as GDPR. However, the absence of a published security policy, incident response plan, and vulnerability disclosure mechanism represents gaps in transparency and readiness. No vulnerable or outdated libraries were detected in the provided content. The security score is high, but improvements in documented policies and communication channels for security incidents would enhance the overall security culture and compliance. The site shows no signs of malware or phishing risks.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a detailed security policy and incident response plan on the website.
  2. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file.
  3. Provide clear contact information for the Data Protection Officer or privacy officer.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and libraries to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance transparency around data retention policies and user privacy practices.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
George Mason University
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
George Mason University
Description
George Mason University is Virginia’s largest, most diverse, and highest-ranked university for innovation. It admits every student academically ready for its top-tier research environment and achieves graduation rates surpassing the national norm.
Key services
Undergraduate and graduate education, Research programs, Online education, Study abroad, Continuing and professional education
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Drupal 10, Font Awesome 6, Google Tag Manager, CookiePro Consent Management
Frameworks
Drupal CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent banner implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of modern libraries

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content.
  2. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.
  3. Comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with consent management.
  4. Use of modern CMS (Drupal 10) and libraries.
  5. Secure HTTPS with strong security headers.
  6. No exposed sensitive data or obvious vulnerabilities.
  7. WHOIS data unavailable, typical for .edu domains.
  8. Multiple official subdomains linked for services.
  9. No adult or questionable content detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is powered by Drupal 10, a modern and widely supported CMS, ensuring a solid technical foundation. It uses Font Awesome 6 for icons and integrates Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing purposes. The site loads external resources from reputable CDNs such as Cloudflare and Google Fonts, contributing to performance and reliability. Mobile optimization and accessibility features are well implemented, supporting a broad user base. Performance is moderate, with potential for optimization in resource loading and caching. The technical stack is current, minimizing technical debt and supporting scalability. No critical technical risks were identified in the analyzed content.
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 gmu.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 gmu.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.