Skip to main content

Security report for ju.se

Jönköping University · Education · Sweden

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and Security headers.

Security score

62/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Jönköping University is a large, well-established educational institution in Sweden with a strong international profile, offering higher education programs, research activities, and collaboration opportunities. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand with good content quality and user experience, targeting students, researchers, and academic partners. Technically, the site uses SiteVision CMS with React frameworks and integrates modern analytics and marketing tools such as Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, and Adform. However, the website suffers from a critical security issue due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate, resulting in a basic SSL configuration and lack of HTTPS enforcement. This significantly impacts the security posture and overall trustworthiness of the site. Privacy compliance is strong, with a comprehensive cookie consent mechanism and GDPR-aligned privacy policy. Contact information and social media presence further enhance business credibility.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
18/ 100 · Critical
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

      EU business without adequate privacy measures

      EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

      What to do: Implement comprehensive GDPR compliance including privacy policy, cookie consent, and data protection measures

    • 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. 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';…

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

Keep watching ju.se

This scan found 19 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
50
Security headers
45
Email security
75
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
18
Average
62

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 university operates in the education sector, focusing on higher education and research with a broad international reach, including 320 partner universities and over 2,300 international students from 100 countries. The business model is public education and research provision, supported by collaborations and events. The website content and structure indicate a mature digital presence with good SEO and accessibility practices. The integration of multiple marketing and analytics tools suggests an emphasis on data-driven user engagement and outreach. The absence of terms of service and explicit security policies may indicate areas for improvement in transparency and governance.

Security posture

The current security posture is weak due to the lack of a valid SSL certificate, no HSTS, no DNSSEC, and absence of security headers. While no critical vulnerabilities like Heartbleed or POODLE are detected, the missing HTTPS is a critical issue that undermines user trust and data protection. The site uses modern JavaScript frameworks but does not implement advanced security best practices such as OCSP stapling or session resumption. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is available, which may affect readiness for security incidents. Privacy compliance is well addressed through cookie consent and privacy policy, but technical security improvements are urgently needed.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS and protect user data in transit.
  2. Implement HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) with includeSubDomains and preload options.
  3. Add security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Enable DNSSEC and CAA records to enhance DNS security and certificate issuance control.
  5. Publish clear security policies, incident response procedures, and vulnerability disclosure guidelines to improve transparency and trust.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on SiteVision CMS with React 17 and 18 frameworks, leveraging modern JavaScript libraries and multiple webapp modules. It integrates Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, and Adform for marketing and analytics. The site is mobile optimized and accessible with good SEO metadata and structured data (JSON-LD). Performance is suboptimal with a high load time (~28 seconds) and a large number of resources (167). The absence of a valid SSL certificate is a major technical risk. The DNS configuration lacks DNSSEC and CAA records, which are recommended for enhanced security. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern but requires security hardening and performance optimization.
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 ju.se. 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 ju.se.

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.