Skip to main content

Security report for towerhealth.org

Tower Health · Healthcare · United States

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

75/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Tower Health is a large regional healthcare provider based in the United States, founded in 2017. The organization offers a comprehensive range of healthcare services including hospitals, urgent care, virtual care, pharmacy, and specialized medical services such as cancer care and neuroscience. The website reflects a mature digital presence with a professional design, clear navigation, and strong branding consistency. It targets patients, medical professionals, and the community with a focus on coordinated and accessible healthcare. Technically, the website is built on Drupal 10, leveraging modern JavaScript libraries and accessibility tools. It integrates Google Analytics and Tag Manager for analytics and marketing, and uses The Trade Desk for advertising and retargeting. The site is mobile optimized and includes accessibility features, although performance is moderate. Security measures include HTTPS enforcement and some security headers, but DNSSEC is not enabled and cookie consent mechanisms are absent. From a security perspective, the site demonstrates good practices with secure forms and no exposed sensitive data. However, it lacks explicit incident response contacts and vulnerability disclosure policies, which are recommended for enhanced security posture. Privacy policies are comprehensive and GDPR compliant, but cookie consent is missing, which could be a compliance gap. Overall, Tower Health's website is professional, trustworthy, and well-positioned in its market. Strategic improvements in DNS security, privacy compliance, and incident response transparency would further strengthen its security and compliance posture.

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

3 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.

    • 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

  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.

    • 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 towerhealth.org

This scan found 21 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
77
Security headers
65
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
75

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

Tower Health operates as a key healthcare provider network in Pennsylvania, serving a broad patient base with multiple hospitals and specialized services. Its business model focuses on integrated healthcare delivery, patient engagement through digital portals, and community health programs. The organization maintains partnerships with academic institutions like Drexel University, enhancing its medical education and research capabilities. Revenue streams likely include patient services, insurance reimbursements, and community health initiatives. The website's integration with career and patient portals indicates a mature operational ecosystem. Growth indicators include digital service expansion such as virtual care and comprehensive service listings. The partnership ecosystem includes academic and career sites, reflecting a strategic approach to workforce and educational alignment.

Security posture

The website exhibits a moderate to good security maturity level. HTTPS is enforced site-wide, and a Content-Security-Policy header is present to upgrade insecure requests. However, DNSSEC is not enabled, which is a recommended best practice for DNS security. No sensitive data leaks or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. Forms use autocomplete off and secure input practices. The absence of explicit incident response contacts and vulnerability disclosure policies represents a gap in security transparency and readiness. Privacy policies are comprehensive and GDPR compliant, but cookie consent mechanisms are lacking, which may impact compliance. Overall, the security posture is solid but could be improved with enhanced DNS security, incident response transparency, and cookie consent implementation.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS integrity and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement a cookie consent banner/mechanism to comply with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  3. Publish explicit incident response contact information and consider a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file.
  4. Enhance HTTP security headers by adding HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection headers.
  5. Regularly review and update third-party scripts and libraries to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Tower Health
Description
Tower Health is a healthcare organization providing coordinated, convenient, and effective healthcare services including hospitals, urgent care, virtual care, pharmacy, cancer care, heart and vascular services, neuroscience, orthopedics, pediatrics, and more.
Key services
Hospitals, Urgent Care, Virtual Care, Pharmacy, Cancer Care, Heart, Vascular, and Thoracic, Neuroscience, Orthopedics, Pediatrics, Primary Care
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Drupal 10, jQuery, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, React Datepicker, UsableNet Accessibility
Frameworks
Drupal
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Security headers present
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure forms with autocomplete off

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
The Trade Desk
Tracking pixels
The Trade Desk Universal Pixel
Marketing tools
LoyalHealth Guide
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is rich and relevant to healthcare services.
  3. Multiple forms for provider and location search with autocomplete features.
  4. Strong social media presence with official accounts linked.
  5. Use of modern web technologies and CMS (Drupal 10).
  6. Security headers are minimal but present; DNSSEC not enabled.
  7. No explicit cookie consent mechanism detected.
  8. Privacy and terms policies are present and comprehensive.
  9. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information found.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Drupal 10, a modern and widely supported CMS, ensuring a solid foundation for content management and security. It uses jQuery and React Datepicker for UI components, and integrates Google Tag Manager and Analytics for marketing and analytics purposes. Accessibility is addressed via UsableNet scripts, indicating attention to compliance and user inclusivity. Hosting appears to be managed through GoDaddy.com, LLC as the registrar, though hosting provider specifics are not explicit. Performance is moderate, with room for optimization. SEO is well supported with canonical links and meta tags. The site is mobile optimized and includes ARIA landmarks and skip links for accessibility. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern and well implemented, with opportunities for performance and security enhancements.
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 towerhealth.org. 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 towerhealth.org.

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.