Skip to main content

Security report for royalberkshire.nhs.uk

Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust · Healthcare · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

55/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust operates as one of the largest general hospital foundation trusts in the UK, serving a population exceeding 500,000 people primarily in Berkshire West. The trust provides a wide range of acute and specialist healthcare services, supported by a comprehensive website that targets patients, visitors, healthcare professionals, researchers, and job seekers. The website features detailed service information, accessibility support, research collaboration opportunities, and career resources, reflecting a strong community and healthcare focus. Technically, the website is built on the Umbraco CMS platform and leverages modern web technologies including Bootstrap, jQuery, Swiper.js, and Google Tag Manager. Accessibility is enhanced through the integration of Browsealoud tools and reCAPTCHA v3 for form security. The site demonstrates good mobile optimization and SEO practices, although performance is moderate and could benefit from further optimization. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and uses reCAPTCHA to protect forms from abuse. However, it lacks visible security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options, and does not publicly disclose security or incident response policies. Privacy compliance is partial, with a privacy policy present but no explicit cookie consent mechanism detected. The domain registration details align well with the NHS trust's identity, supporting high legitimacy and trustworthiness. Overall, the Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust website is a professional, trustworthy, and functional digital presence for a major healthcare provider. Strategic improvements in security headers, privacy compliance, and explicit security disclosures would further enhance its security posture and regulatory adherence.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
28/ 100 · High
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

6 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

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

    • 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

  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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  3. 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 royalberkshire.nhs.uk

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.

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
Security headers
45
Email security
70
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
28
Average
55

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 trust holds a strong market position as a major NHS foundation trust serving Berkshire West. Its business model is public healthcare provision, funded and regulated under NHS frameworks. The website supports multiple stakeholder groups including patients, visitors, researchers, and potential employees, indicating a broad target audience. Partnerships with academic institutions and charities are evident, enhancing research and community engagement. The trust's digital presence reflects a commitment to accessibility and patient support, with ongoing initiatives such as the New Hospital Programme. The absence of commercial advertising and affiliate programs aligns with its public service mandate.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with mandatory HTTPS, use of Google reCAPTCHA v3, and integrity attributes on external resources. However, the absence of key HTTP security headers and lack of publicly available security policies or incident response contacts represent gaps. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The site would benefit from publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy and implementing additional security headers to mitigate risks such as clickjacking and cross-site scripting. Privacy compliance is partial, with no visible cookie consent mechanism, which may expose the trust to regulatory scrutiny under GDPR.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive cookie policy with an explicit consent mechanism to ensure GDPR compliance.
  2. Add HTTP security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
  4. Create and host a vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
  5. Conduct regular security audits and penetration testing to identify and remediate potential vulnerabilities proactively.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust
Description
One of the largest general hospital foundation trusts in the UK, serving over 500,000 people and providing acute and specialist care services for Berkshire West.
Key services
Hospital services, Patient and visitor information, Research, Careers and volunteering
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap 5.3.2, jQuery 3.7.1, Swiper.js, Vimeo Player API, Umbraco Forms, Google reCAPTCHA v3, Google Tag Manager, Browsealoud accessibility tools
Frameworks
Umbraco CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Google reCAPTCHA v3 on forms
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of integrity and crossorigin attributes on external scripts and styles

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professionally designed NHS trust site with comprehensive patient and visitor information.
  2. Accessibility features are implemented including Browsealoud toolbar.
  3. No explicit cookie consent banner detected, which may be a compliance gap.
  4. Security practices are good but could be improved with additional HTTP headers and explicit security policies.
  5. Social media presence is strong with official accounts linked.
  6. WHOIS data supports legitimacy and trust in the domain.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern technology stack with Umbraco CMS, Bootstrap 5, jQuery, and Swiper.js, supporting responsive and accessible design. Google Tag Manager is used for analytics and tracking, and Vimeo API supports embedded video content. The site uses Google reCAPTCHA v3 to protect forms from spam and abuse. External resources are loaded with integrity and crossorigin attributes, enhancing security. Performance is moderate, with potential for optimization in resource loading and caching. Accessibility is well addressed through Browsealoud integration and semantic HTML structure. The site lacks some advanced SEO metadata and structured data (no JSON-LD found), which could be improved for better search engine visibility.
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 royalberkshire.nhs.uk. 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 royalberkshire.nhs.uk.

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.