Skip to main content

Security report for marylandboost.org

MD non public school coalition organization · Education · United States

High risk. 10 critical or high findings in Network security, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

33/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Maryland BOOST Scholarship Coalition is a small non-profit organization advocating for and supporting the Maryland BOOST scholarship program, which provides educational options to income-eligible children in Maryland. The website serves as an informational and advocacy platform targeting parents, educators, and concerned citizens in Maryland. It promotes scholarship applications and encourages legislative support. Technically, the site is built on WordPress using the Astra theme, with common analytics and tracking tools such as Google Analytics and Facebook Pixel. However, the site suffers from a lack of HTTPS/SSL configuration, resulting in a poor security posture. There are no privacy or cookie policies present, and security best practices such as security headers and DMARC are missing. Overall, the site is functional with good content quality and user experience but requires significant improvements in security and privacy compliance to enhance trust and protect users.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 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

10 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Network security

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

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • 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
    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: PostgreSQL

      Port 5432 (PostgreSQL) is publicly accessible - PostgreSQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to PostgreSQL using firewall or VPN

      • 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

  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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

    • 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 marylandboost.org

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. 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
50
Security headers
15
Email security
50
DNS health
60
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
25
Average
33

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 · found on this site
  • 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 coalition operates in the education sector, focusing on scholarship advocacy and information dissemination. Its market position is that of a niche advocacy group supporting a state-funded program. The business model is non-profit and advocacy-based, relying on coalition building and public engagement. The target audience includes Maryland families eligible for scholarships, educators, and policymakers. The organization has a consistent brand presence and leverages social media (Facebook) for outreach. The domain age and registrant information align well with the organization's founding and mission, indicating legitimacy. However, the lack of comprehensive contact information and absence of formal policies may limit credibility with some stakeholders.

Security posture

The website's security posture is weak due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS support, exposing users to potential data interception risks. No security headers are implemented, and critical email authentication mechanisms like DMARC are missing. DNSSEC is not enabled, and domain protection locks are absent, increasing risk of domain hijacking. The site uses common tracking technologies but lacks transparency in privacy and cookie policies, which may raise compliance concerns. Incident response and security policy information are not provided, indicating limited preparedness for security events. Immediate remediation of SSL/TLS and privacy compliance is recommended to reduce risk and improve user trust.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and install a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Implement HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) to enforce secure connections.
  3. Publish clear and comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and other regulations.
  4. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  5. Configure DMARC, SPF, and DKIM records to protect email domain from spoofing.
  6. Enable DNSSEC and domain protection locks to safeguard domain integrity.
  7. Provide additional contact information including phone number and physical address for transparency.
  8. Establish and publish a security incident response policy and contact channels.
  9. Optimize website performance to reduce load times and resource count.
  10. Enhance accessibility features to improve user experience for all visitors.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
MD non public school coalition organization
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with the Astra theme, using jQuery and several plugins including PixelYourSite for tracking and Google Analytics for analytics. The site loads slowly with a large page size (~1.6MB) and many resources (128). Mobile optimization is good, and SEO meta tags including Open Graph and JSON-LD structured data are present, supporting social sharing and search engine indexing. Hosting appears to be with Network Solutions, consistent with the registrar. However, the lack of HTTPS and SSL certificate is a critical technical deficiency. No modern TLS protocols or cipher suites are enabled, and no session resumption or OCSP stapling is configured. The site lacks DNSSEC and DMARC records, reducing DNS and email security. Overall, the technical infrastructure is functional but outdated in security and performance aspects, requiring modernization and hardening.
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 marylandboost.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 marylandboost.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.