Skip to main content

Security report for ucla.edu

University of California, Los Angeles · Education · United States

Medium risk. 5 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 University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) is a prestigious public university recognized for its excellence in education and research. The website serves as a comprehensive portal for students, faculty, alumni, and the public, offering detailed information on academics, research, campus life, events, and news. UCLA holds a top market position as a leading public university in the United States, supported by strong branding and trust indicators such as Nobel laureates and extensive social media presence. Technically, the website employs a modern technology stack including Google Custom Search, various analytics and tracking tools (Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, TikTok Analytics, Twitter Tag), and popular JavaScript libraries like jQuery and FancyBox. The site is mobile optimized, accessible, and SEO friendly, though performance is moderate likely due to the rich content and third-party integrations. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS with good SSL configuration and no visible exposed sensitive data. However, security headers are not explicitly detected, and no dedicated security policy or incident response contacts are published. The WHOIS data is unavailable, which is common for .edu domains, but the site’s legitimacy is supported by consistent branding and institutional content. Overall, UCLA’s website demonstrates a mature digital presence with strong business credibility and privacy compliance. Recommendations include enhancing security headers, publishing a security policy, and adding a vulnerability disclosure mechanism to further strengthen the security 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

5 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 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 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

  3. DNS health

    DNS sends visitors and email to the right servers. Misconfigured records can cause outages or let someone redirect your traffic.

    • High

      Weak SPF Policy

      SPF record has permissive policy allowing any server to send email

      What to do: Use -all or ~all qualifier for better email security

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

Keep watching ucla.edu

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
90
Security headers
40
Email security
60
DNS health
65
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

UCLA operates as a large public educational institution under the University of California system. Its market positioning is strong, being ranked as the number one public university in the U.S. The business model focuses on delivering high-quality education, research, and community engagement. Revenue streams likely include tuition, government funding, research grants, and donations. The target audience spans prospective and current students, faculty, researchers, alumni, and the wider community. The university maintains a broad partnership ecosystem including athletics, extension programs, health services, and arts initiatives. The website reflects strategic communication efforts to engage diverse stakeholders and promote institutional achievements.

Security posture

The website exhibits a good security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and no visible sensitive data leaks. The use of multiple third-party analytics and tracking scripts introduces a moderate risk surface that requires ongoing monitoring. The absence of security headers and a published security policy or incident response contact reduces transparency and preparedness. No vulnerabilities or malware indicators were detected in the HTML content. Compliance with privacy regulations is evident through comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms. Overall, the security posture is solid but could be improved by adopting additional best practices and transparency measures.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy page including incident response procedures and contact information to improve transparency and trust.
  3. Add a security.txt file at the root domain to facilitate responsible vulnerability disclosure.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and libraries to mitigate risks from vulnerable dependencies.
  5. Enhance monitoring and validation of form inputs to prevent injection attacks and data leakage.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
University of California, Los Angeles
Description
UCLA advances knowledge, addresses pressing societal needs and creates a university enriched by diverse perspectives where all individuals can flourish.
Key services
Undergraduate and graduate education, Research programs, Campus life and student services, Community engagement and events
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Custom Search Engine, jQuery, FancyBox, Masonry, LazyLoad, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, TikTok Analytics, Twitter Universal Website Tag, YouTube Iframe API
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of secure external analytics and tag managers

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via GTM), Facebook Analytics, TikTok Analytics, Twitter Analytics, LinkedIn Analytics
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Adsense, Twitter Ads
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, TikTok Pixel, Twitter Universal Website Tag, LinkedIn Insight Tag
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and navigation
  2. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected
  3. Strong presence of official university branding and trust signals
  4. Extensive use of third-party analytics and marketing tools
  5. No security.txt or explicit security policy found
  6. WHOIS data unavailable, typical for .edu domains
  7. Cookie and privacy policies are present and include consent mechanisms
  8. No contact forms detected on main page; contact info provided in footer
  9. Social media presence is strong and verified
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using a combination of modern JavaScript libraries and third-party services, including Google Custom Search, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, TikTok Analytics, and Twitter tracking. It uses jQuery, FancyBox for media display, Masonry for layout, and LazyLoad for performance optimization. The site is mobile responsive and includes accessibility features such as skip navigation links and ARIA labels. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and Open Graph data. Performance is moderate, likely due to the volume of content and external scripts. No CMS was explicitly detected. Hosting provider details are not available from the HTML content.
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 ucla.edu. 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 ucla.edu.

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.