Skip to main content

Security report for hopkinsmedicine.org

Johns Hopkins Medicine · Healthcare · United States

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

78/100

Risk levelLow

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

Johns Hopkins Medicine is a leading healthcare and academic institution in the United States, offering comprehensive patient care, cutting-edge medical research, and top-ranked medical education. The website reflects its market position with professional design, clear navigation, and rich content targeting patients, medical professionals, and students. The institution is highly reputable and recognized nationally and internationally. Technically, the website employs modern JavaScript libraries such as jQuery and integrates Piwik PRO for analytics and OneTrust for cookie consent management, indicating a mature digital infrastructure. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, with good SEO practices and performance. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS and cookie consent mechanisms but lacks explicit security headers and publicly available security policies or incident response contacts. No vulnerabilities or suspicious elements were detected in the content or linked domains, supporting a strong security posture. Overall, the website demonstrates high business credibility, privacy compliance, and technical quality, with minor recommendations to enhance security headers and publish security policies. The domain WHOIS data is unavailable but the domain is globally recognized and trusted, consistent with the institution's reputation.

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
    • 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. 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 hopkinsmedicine.org

This scan found 16 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
75
Security headers
55
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
Average
78

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

Johns Hopkins Medicine holds a dominant position in the healthcare sector, combining patient care, research, and education. Its business model is centered on providing high-quality medical services and advancing medical knowledge. The institution benefits from strong brand recognition, multiple subsidiary hospitals, and a broad target audience including patients and medical professionals. The website supports its business intelligence with clear service offerings, appointment scheduling, billing assistance, and research highlights. The presence on multiple social media platforms and rankings in U.S. News & World Report further reinforce its competitive advantages and growth potential.

Security posture

The website exhibits a mature security posture with HTTPS enforcement and cookie consent compliance. However, it lacks visible security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options, which are recommended to mitigate common web threats. There is no publicly disclosed security policy or incident response contact, which could be improved to enhance transparency and readiness. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected. Overall, the security posture is strong but could benefit from formalized policies and additional HTTP security headers.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a formal security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
  2. Add HTTP security headers including Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options to enhance protection against common attacks.
  3. Consider publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party libraries to ensure no vulnerabilities are introduced.
  5. Enhance transparency by providing clear data retention policies related to analytics and user data.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Johns Hopkins Medicine
Description
Johns Hopkins Medicine is a leading health system and academic institution in the U.S. providing patient care, research, and education.
Key services
Patient care, Medical research, Medical education, Appointments and billing services
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery 3.7.1, jQuery Migrate 1.4.1, Piwik PRO analytics, OneTrust cookie consent
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Piwik PRO
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Piwik PRO
Marketing tools
OneTrust cookie consent
Transparency
good

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 and professional design.
  2. Strong focus on healthcare, research, and education services.
  3. Comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms.
  4. No security policy or incident response information publicly available.
  5. No suspicious or malicious indicators found in content or links.
  6. Social media presence on major platforms supports legitimacy.
  7. WHOIS data unavailable but domain is globally recognized and trusted.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a combination of jQuery and jQuery Migrate libraries, indicating some legacy support but overall modern JavaScript usage. Piwik PRO is used for analytics, providing privacy-focused tracking. OneTrust manages cookie consent, ensuring compliance with privacy regulations. The site is well-structured with semantic HTML and meta tags supporting SEO and social media sharing. Performance is moderate with room for optimization. Mobile responsiveness and accessibility features are well implemented, supporting a broad user base. No CMS or hosting provider details were explicitly detected from the HTML 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 hopkinsmedicine.org. 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 hopkinsmedicine.org.

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.