Skip to main content

Security report for stpaul.gov

City of Saint Paul · Government · United States

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The City of Saint Paul operates an official municipal government website providing a broad range of services and information to residents, businesses, and visitors. The site is well-structured, professionally designed, and targets a diverse audience including local citizens and government stakeholders. It offers comprehensive resources such as permits, licenses, public safety information, parks and recreation, and community engagement platforms. The website leverages modern technologies including Drupal 11 CMS, Google Analytics, and Font Awesome icons, reflecting a mature digital infrastructure. Security is robust with HTTPS enforced and standard security headers implemented, although explicit security policies and incident response contacts are not prominently published. Privacy and cookie policies are present with consent mechanisms, indicating good compliance with data protection regulations. Overall, the site demonstrates a high level of professionalism and trustworthiness consistent with an official government entity.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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

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.

    • 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

  2. 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';…

  3. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

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

Keep watching stpaul.gov

This scan found 23 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
62
Security headers
40
Email security
75
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
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

Saint Paul’s municipal website positions itself as a central hub for city governance and public services, supporting transparency and community involvement. The business model is government service provision, funded by public resources, focusing on accessibility and comprehensive service delivery. The site integrates with partner domains such as Ramsey County and local conservatories, enhancing its ecosystem. The presence of detailed navigation and extensive content indicates a strategic approach to citizen engagement and service facilitation. The lack of WHOIS data is typical for .gov domains and does not detract from credibility. The site’s use of analytics and tracking is moderate and privacy-conscious, balancing operational insights with user privacy.

Security posture

The website exhibits a solid security posture with HTTPS and multiple security headers in place, reducing common web vulnerabilities. The use of IP anonymization in analytics reflects privacy-aware practices. However, the absence of a publicly accessible security policy or vulnerability disclosure program limits transparency in security governance. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. Recommendations include publishing a security policy, establishing a vulnerability disclosure channel, and enhancing incident response visibility to improve security maturity and stakeholder trust.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and compliance.
  2. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file.
  3. Enhance incident response contact information for timely reporting and resolution.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and CMS modules to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Maintain and improve privacy compliance with clear data retention and user rights information.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
City of Saint Paul
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
City of Saint Paul
Description
Official website of the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota providing information and services to residents, businesses, and visitors.
Key services
City government information, Public services, Permits and licenses, Community engagement, Parks and recreation, Public safety, Business resources
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Drupal 11, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Font Awesome 6 Pro
Frameworks
Drupal
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • IP anonymization in Google Analytics
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security headers

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
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. Official city government website with comprehensive content and navigation.
  2. Uses modern CMS (Drupal 11) and standard web technologies.
  3. Includes Google Analytics and Tag Manager with IP anonymization.
  4. No signs of adult or malicious content.
  5. WHOIS data is missing or restricted, common for .gov domains.
  6. Security headers and HTTPS are properly implemented.
  7. No visible security policy or incident response page found.
  8. Privacy and cookie policies are present with consent mechanisms.
  9. Contact information is well provided across multiple pages.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Drupal 11, a modern and widely supported CMS, ensuring scalability and security. It uses Google Analytics and Tag Manager for user behavior insights, with IP anonymization enabled to protect privacy. Font Awesome 6 Pro icons enhance visual appeal and usability. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, with good SEO practices including meta tags and Open Graph data. Performance is moderate, likely influenced by the extensive content and third-party integrations. Technical risks are minimal but require ongoing CMS and module updates to prevent security issues. Hosting details are not explicitly identified but the site uses a .gov domain, implying government hosting or approved providers.
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 stpaul.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 stpaul.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.