Skip to main content

Security report for sfc.ac.uk

Scottish Funding Council · Education · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Scottish Funding Council (SFC) is Scotland’s national authority responsible for funding and overseeing tertiary education and research. The organization supports colleges and universities across Scotland to sustain a world-leading education and research system that benefits students and society. The website reflects a mature, government-backed entity with a clear mission and comprehensive service offerings including funding, assurance, skills development, and research innovation. The target audience includes educational institutions, students, researchers, and policy makers within Scotland. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with modern plugins and SEO optimizations, delivering a responsive and accessible user experience. Security posture is strong with HTTPS, cookie consent mechanisms, and no visible vulnerabilities, although explicit security headers could be enhanced. Overall, the site demonstrates high professionalism, trustworthiness, and compliance with GDPR and UK regulations.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
80/ 100 · Low
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

4 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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 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';…
  2. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

  3. 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.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

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

Keep watching sfc.ac.uk

This scan found 22 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
77
Security headers
25
Email security
85
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
80
Average
73

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 sfc.ac.uk, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
38
Employees
0
Customers
35
Third parties
3
Weak passwords
0%

2 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for sfc.ac.uk.

Select it in the checkout above.

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

SFC holds a strong market position as the official tertiary education and research funding authority in Scotland. Its business model is government-funded, focusing on allocation of resources and policy implementation rather than commercial revenue. The website ecosystem includes partner domains such as jobs.sfc.ac.uk and apprenticeships.scot, supporting recruitment and skills development. The organization’s long domain history and consistent branding reinforce its credibility. The site’s content and navigation cater well to its diverse stakeholders, supporting transparency and engagement. Growth indicators include active publication of news, blogs, and strategic plans. The partnership ecosystem is aligned with Scottish government and educational institutions.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate, uses Google reCAPTCHA for bot protection, and implements a cookie consent mechanism aligned with GDPR. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. Security headers are not explicitly visible in the HTML but may be configured at the server level; their explicit verification is recommended. The site lacks a public security policy or incident response contact, which could improve transparency and readiness. Overall, the security posture is good for a government educational site, with room for enhancement in header policies and incident response disclosures.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and verify explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to strengthen browser security.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and trust.
  3. Regularly audit third-party scripts and plugins for vulnerabilities and update them promptly.
  4. Ensure all forms have CSRF protection and robust input validation to prevent injection attacks.
  5. Maintain and update privacy and cookie policies to reflect any changes in data processing or regulatory requirements.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Scottish Funding Council
Description
Scotland’s tertiary education and research authority. Our purpose is to sustain a world-leading system of tertiary education, research and innovation that enables students to flourish, changes lives for the better, and supports social, economic and environmental wellbeing and prosperity.
Key services
Funding for colleges and universities, Research and innovation funding, Assurance and accountability frameworks, Skills and lifelong learning programs, Data and analysis for education sector
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Yoast SEO plugin, Google Fonts, Google Tag Manager, Pingdom Real User Monitoring, Relevanssi Live Ajax Search, Flatpickr date picker, 3D Flipbook plugin, jQuery
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism with opt-in/out
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA for bot protection

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Pingdom RUM
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a government-funded educational authority for Scotland
  2. Content is comprehensive and well-structured
  3. Strong compliance with GDPR and cookie consent requirements
  4. Use of modern web technologies and SEO best practices
  5. No signs of malicious or suspicious activity
  6. No exposed sensitive information or security misconfigurations detected
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS, leveraging popular plugins such as Yoast SEO for search optimization, Relevanssi for live search, and Flatpickr for date inputs. It uses Google Fonts and Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and accessible navigation. Performance is moderate, with some external dependencies on third-party CDNs and scripts. The technical stack is modern and well-maintained, though performance could be improved by optimizing script loading and caching strategies. The site uses standard web technologies including HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript with jQuery. No deprecated or vulnerable libraries were detected in the provided HTML.
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 sfc.ac.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 sfc.ac.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.