Skip to main content

Security report for sourcewell-mn.gov

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website at sourcewell-mn.gov is currently inaccessible due to a blocking mechanism, likely a Web Application Firewall (WAF) or other security control, as indicated by the minimal HTML content stating 'The request is blocked.' and absence of any substantive page content. This prevents a full assessment of the business, technical infrastructure, and security posture. The domain is registered since 2018 with privacy protection enabled, hosted on Microsoft Azure DNS servers, which suggests a legitimate and stable infrastructure, but no further business details are available from the site content. Due to the blocking, no privacy, cookie, or security policies, nor contact information, are accessible for review. The security posture cannot be evaluated beyond the presence of blocking controls. Overall, the site appears to be protected by security mechanisms that restrict access, limiting external analysis.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 100 · Medium
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

7 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 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';…

  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

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

Keep watching sourcewell-mn.gov

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. 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
72
Security headers
20
Email security
85
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
68

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

No business intelligence data could be extracted from the website content due to access restrictions. The domain age and hosting provider suggest a government or public sector entity, but no information on market positioning, services, or partnerships is available. The lack of accessible content and contact details limits insights into the company's operations or competitive advantages.

Security posture

The security posture appears to include at least a blocking mechanism such as a WAF, which is effective in preventing unauthorized access or scraping. However, no information on security headers, SSL configuration, incident response, or vulnerability disclosure is available. The absence of visible security policies or contact channels for security incidents indicates limited transparency. The domain uses Azure DNS but DNSSEC is not enabled, which could be improved. Overall, security controls are partially evident but cannot be fully assessed.

Recommendations

  1. Provide a publicly accessible landing page or status page to allow external users and analysts to verify site legitimacy and content.
  2. Enable DNSSEC to improve DNS security and integrity.
  3. Publish privacy, cookie, and security policies to enhance transparency and compliance.
  4. Implement and expose security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information to facilitate responsible security reporting.
  5. Ensure contact information is available for business and security inquiries to improve trust and communication.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. The page content indicates a blocked request with a minimal HTML message 'The request is blocked.' and no other content, consistent with a WAF or security mechanism blocking access. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Analytics and tracking

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website content is inaccessible due to blocking or WAF.
  2. No metadata, scripts, forms, or business content available for analysis.
  3. No contact information or policies found on the page.
  4. Domain WHOIS data shows privacy protection and Azure DNS hosting.
  5. No security headers or SSL configuration details available from provided data.
  6. No external links or social media references found in the HTML content.
  7. Content safety is rated safe due to lack of content and no adult material.
  8. Analysis is incomplete due to WAF/security mechanisms. For accurate analysis, please contact guard@offseq.com.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is hosted on Microsoft Azure DNS infrastructure with four Azure DNS name servers. The domain registration is current and valid until 2026. No CMS, scripts, or technologies are detectable due to the blocked content. The HTML is minimal and does not include meta tags, Open Graph, JSON-LD, or any SEO elements. Performance, accessibility, and mobile optimization cannot be assessed. The lack of DNSSEC and absence of visible security headers are noted technical gaps. Overall, the technical infrastructure appears stable but lacks visible modern web features or optimizations.
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 sourcewell-mn.gov. 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 sourcewell-mn.gov.

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.