Skip to main content

Security report for polb.com

Port of Long Beach · Transportation · United States

Partial score · DNS & email only

57/100

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

The Port of Long Beach is a major U.S. seaport operating as a government port authority, facilitating international trade and maritime logistics. The website reflects a well-established entity with a long history dating back to 1996, offering comprehensive port services, environmental stewardship, and community engagement. The site targets businesses, shipping companies, government agencies, and the local community, positioning itself as a key player in the transportation sector. Technically, the website is built on modern frameworks such as React and Gatsby, hosted via Akamai CDN, and employs advanced UI components including Mobiscroll and Gravity Forms. The site demonstrates excellent performance, mobile responsiveness, and accessibility, with strong SEO and metadata implementation. Security is robust with HTTPS, multiple security headers, and domain transfer protections, although DNSSEC is not enabled. From a security perspective, the site shows good maturity with no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data. Privacy and cookie policies are present and GDPR compliant, with consent mechanisms in place. However, the absence of a formal security policy, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms suggests room for improvement in transparency and incident readiness. Overall, the Port of Long Beach website is a professional, secure, and trustworthy digital presence for a large government transportation entity. Strategic recommendations include enabling DNSSEC, publishing security and incident response policies, and adding vulnerability disclosure information to enhance security posture and stakeholder trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
Checks completed
6of 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. 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.

    • Critical

      Unable to retrieve SSL certificate

      Could not establish secure connection to retrieve certificate information

      What to do: Check if the server is accessible and SSL/TLS is properly configured

  2. GDPR outside view

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

    • High

      No Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

    • 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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

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

Keep watching polb.com

This scan found 14 issues across 5 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
0
Email security
75
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
57

Not counted

  • Security headers: did not complete in this scan.
  • 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 Port of Long Beach holds a strong market position as one of the largest and busiest ports in the United States, serving as a critical hub for international trade. Its business model as a port authority involves managing port operations, environmental programs, and community relations. Revenue streams likely include port fees, leases, and grants. The target customers include shipping lines, logistics companies, importers/exporters, and local stakeholders. The website content and structure indicate a mature organization with a focus on sustainability and community impact. Partnerships with government and industry stakeholders are implied but not explicitly detailed on the site. The digital presence supports business growth and stakeholder engagement effectively.

Security posture

The website exhibits a strong security posture with enforced HTTPS, comprehensive security headers, and domain transfer lock status. No DNSSEC is enabled, which is a recommended enhancement. The site uses secure forms with CAPTCHA and input validation, reducing risk of injection attacks. No exposed credentials or sensitive data were found in the HTML content. Privacy policies and cookie consent mechanisms align with GDPR requirements. However, the lack of a published security policy, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure program indicates gaps in security transparency and incident management readiness. Overall, the site is secure but could improve in formalizing security governance and communication.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Publish a formal security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
  3. Implement a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Regularly review and update privacy and cookie policies to maintain compliance with evolving regulations.
  5. Enhance transparency by providing security certifications or third-party audit results if available.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Port of Long Beach
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Port of Long Beach
Description
The Port of Long Beach is a major seaport in the United States, serving as a gateway for international trade and commerce. It provides port operations, environmental stewardship, community engagement, and business development services.
Key services
Cargo handling, Port operations, Environmental programs, Community grants and outreach, Business development
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
React, Gatsby, Google Tag Manager, Mobiscroll, Gravity Forms
Frameworks
React, Gatsby
Platforms
Web
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • ClientTransferProhibited domain status
  • No DNSSEC enabled (recommend enabling)
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure forms with CAPTCHA and validation

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professionally maintained government port authority site
  2. Comprehensive content with clear navigation and multiple service offerings
  3. Strong security posture with HTTPS and security headers
  4. No signs of malicious or suspicious activity
  5. Good privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms
  6. No visible security policy or incident response contact information
  7. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern web technologies including React and Gatsby, indicating a static site generation approach optimized for performance and SEO. Hosting via Akamai CDN ensures fast global content delivery. The use of Mobiscroll and Gravity Forms provides rich UI components and form handling capabilities. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and accessibility considerations. Security headers and HTTPS are properly configured. The technical stack is modern and well-implemented, supporting a high-quality user experience. Opportunities exist to enable DNSSEC and further improve security governance documentation.
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 polb.com. 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 polb.com.

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.