Campus Digital is a technology platform offering a secure digital identity solution for universities and their students. The platform facilitates access to academic services, communications, and benefits through a mobile app, positioning itself as a trusted partner for educational institutions. The website demonstrates a professional and consistent brand presence, supported by testimonials and partnerships, notably with Santander. Technically, the site is built on a modern Angular framework, integrates Google Analytics and Tag Manager for tracking, and employs reCAPTCHA for form security. Privacy compliance is well addressed with a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie consent mechanism. However, the absence of WHOIS registration data raises concerns about domain legitimacy and transparency. Security posture is moderate, with room for improvement in security headers and incident response disclosures. Overall, the site is functional and trustworthy but would benefit from enhanced transparency and security practices.
Scanned ·
NIS2 and GDPR posture
GDPR outside view
88/ 100 · Low
Checks completed
7of 7
NIS2 Art. 21(2)
a(a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
b(b) Incident handling: One indicator
c(c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
d(d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
e(e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
f(f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
g(g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
h(h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
i(i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
j(j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside
Partly checked
One indicator
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.
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.
Critical
No email authentication configured
Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing
What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately
High
No SPF record found
SPF helps prevent email spoofing
What to do: Add SPF record: "v=spf1 include:_spf.yourmailprovider.com ~all"
This scan found 18 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.
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
77
Security headers
90
Email security
40
DNS health
70
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
Breach exposure
Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.
Dark web exposure
Add-on
Leaked records that mention mycampusdigital.com, from OffSeq Breach.
No leaked records found
Breach holds no records for mycampusdigital.com right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.
Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.
Business context
Business profile
Campus Digital operates in the education technology sector, targeting universities and students with a B2B SaaS model. Its competitive advantage lies in providing a unified digital credential and communication platform that replaces physical student cards, improving user experience and operational efficiency. The business leverages partnerships with financial institutions like Santander to offer additional benefits. The website content and partner logos indicate a medium-sized enterprise with a focus on digital transformation in education. Growth potential is supported by integration services and a clear onboarding process. The lack of explicit company registration details and contact emails suggests a need for improved corporate transparency to strengthen market trust.
Security posture
The website shows a moderate security maturity level. It uses HTTPS and reCAPTCHA to protect user input forms and implements cookie consent in compliance with GDPR. However, no explicit security headers (such as CSP, HSTS, or X-Frame-Options) were detected, and there is no published security policy or incident response information. The absence of a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file limits transparency and user trust in security responsiveness. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were identified in the analysis. To enhance security posture, the organization should implement recommended HTTP security headers, publish security policies, and establish clear incident response and vulnerability disclosure channels.
Recommendations
Implement and enforce HTTP security headers including Content Security Policy, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
Establish and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
Verify and update WHOIS registration data to improve domain transparency and trustworthiness.
Enhance contact information availability by providing verified company emails and phone numbers for support and sales.
Site observations
Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.
Business
Company
Campus Digital
Description
Campus digital is a set of mobile apps that facilitate university life, through a secure digital identity
Key services
Digital Credential, Communications channel between university and students, Academic services access, Santander benefits information
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent
Technology
Stack
Angular 17, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, reCAPTCHA v3, OneTrust Cookie Consent
Frameworks
Angular
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good
Security
Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
Use of reCAPTCHA v3 for form protection
Cookie consent mechanism implemented
Analytics and tracking
Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good
Advertising
Transparency
good
Site quality
Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
high
Key observations
Website is fully accessible with rich content and multiple sections
Cookie consent and privacy policy are implemented and accessible
Contact form collects personal data with reCAPTCHA protection
No explicit emails or phone numbers found in visible content
WHOIS data is missing, which is a concern for domain legitimacy
Use of modern frontend framework Angular 17
Integration with Google Analytics and Tag Manager for tracking
No visible security.txt or incident response info
No explicit security headers detected in provided data
Technical notes
Notes
The website is developed using Angular 17, indicating a modern and maintainable frontend architecture. It integrates Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics for marketing and user behavior tracking, and uses reCAPTCHA v3 to protect forms from spam and abuse. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and includes accessibility considerations, though these could be improved. Performance is moderate, with no major issues detected in the provided data. The hosting provider and CMS are not explicitly identified. The site uses OneTrust for cookie consent management, demonstrating compliance with privacy regulations. Opportunities exist to improve technical SEO and accessibility further, and to implement stronger security controls at the HTTP header level.
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.
Reviews of this site
Share your experience with mycampusdigital.com. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.
Community rating
No published reviews yet. Be the first to review mycampusdigital.com.