Skip to main content

Security report for highsted.kent.sch.uk

Highsted Grammar School · Education · United Kingdom

High risk. 7 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, Email security and 3 other checks.

Security score

49/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Highsted Grammar School is a well-established educational institution in the United Kingdom, focusing on secondary and sixth form education for young women. The school emphasizes a supportive and cohesive community environment that fosters leadership and personal development. The website reflects a professional and comprehensive digital presence, providing detailed information about the school, curriculum, wellbeing, and community engagement. The target audience includes students, parents, and the local community. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with modern JavaScript libraries for interactive elements and is optimized for mobile devices with good SEO practices. Security posture is solid with HTTPS enforced and secure form handling, though there is room for improvement in security headers and explicit incident response policies. Privacy compliance is addressed with clear privacy and cookie policies, though a cookie consent mechanism is not evident. Overall, the website is trustworthy and professionally maintained, supporting the school's reputation and operational needs.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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

7 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

  2. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • High

      No DMARC record found

      DMARC provides email authentication and reporting

      What to do: Add DMARC record: "v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@yourdomain.com"

  3. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • High

      High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

      Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

      What to do: Consider restricting access to FTP or implementing strong authentication

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

  4. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

  5. 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

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

Keep watching highsted.kent.sch.uk

This scan found 24 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
57
Security headers
15
Email security
65
DNS health
70
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
68
Average
49

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 school operates in the education sector, serving a medium-sized community in Kent, UK. Its business model is that of a grammar school providing academic education and enrichment programs. The website highlights key services such as curriculum details, student leadership, wellbeing initiatives, and community partnerships. The school maintains active engagement with parents and the community through newsletters, social media, and accessible contact channels. The partnership with external services like Sims Parent App and Parent Pay indicates integration with educational management platforms. The website's design and content quality position the school as a reputable institution with a strong local presence and commitment to student development.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a good security baseline with HTTPS enabled and secure contact forms via Contact Form 7. However, no explicit security headers were detected in the provided data, which could enhance protection against common web vulnerabilities. There is no visible security or incident response policy, which is a gap in compliance and readiness. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found in the HTML content. The absence of analytics tracking reduces privacy risks but also limits insight into user behavior. Overall, the security posture is adequate for an educational website but could be improved with additional security controls and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance protection.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner/mechanism to comply fully with GDPR requirements.
  3. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response plan accessible to users.
  4. Regularly audit and update WordPress core, themes, and plugins to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all visitors.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Highsted Grammar School
Description
Highsted Grammar School is an educational institution focused on providing a cohesive and supportive environment for young women to learn and develop leadership skills for future societal roles.
Key services
Secondary education, Sixth form education, Student wellbeing and leadership programs, Community engagement, Curriculum and examination resources
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, jQuery, Swiper.js, Owl Carousel, Instagram Feed Plugin, Google Fonts, Typekit Fonts
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of secure contact forms (Contact Form 7 plugin)

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is rich, well-structured, and professionally presented.
  3. Contact information is clear and consistent with an educational institution.
  4. No security or privacy policy pages beyond standard privacy, cookie, and terms pages.
  5. No visible security headers detected in provided data.
  6. No analytics or tracking scripts detected beyond Instagram feed and standard WordPress scripts.
  7. WHOIS data is unavailable, limiting domain registration trust analysis.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses WordPress CMS with a combination of jQuery, Swiper.js, and Owl Carousel for interactive UI components. Fonts are loaded from Google Fonts and Adobe Typekit, ensuring good typography. The Instagram Feed plugin integrates social media content dynamically. The site is mobile responsive with a clean and modern design. Performance is moderate, likely influenced by multiple external font and script resources. No advanced frameworks or hosting provider details were identified. The site uses standard WordPress plugins for contact forms and social media integration, indicating a typical mid-level technical infrastructure suitable for an educational institution.
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 highsted.kent.sch.uk. 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 highsted.kent.sch.uk.

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.