Skip to main content

Security report for upmc.com

UPMC · Healthcare · United States

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

UPMC is a leading healthcare provider and hospital system prominently positioned as the #1 ranked hospital in Pittsburgh according to U.S. News. The website serves patients and healthcare consumers by providing services such as doctor search and appointment requests. The digital infrastructure is built on a modern CMS (Sitecore) and integrates multiple third-party analytics and marketing tools including Piwik PRO, Visual Website Optimizer, and Cookiebot for consent management. The site demonstrates professional design, mobile optimization, and good SEO practices. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS usage and cookie consent mechanisms, but lacks visible security headers and explicit security policies in the provided content. WHOIS data is unavailable, likely due to privacy protection, which slightly reduces trust but is common for large enterprises. Overall, the website is professional, trustworthy, and well-positioned in the healthcare sector.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 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

3 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. 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 upmc.com

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
67
Security headers
30
Email security
75
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
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 upmc.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
3,692
Employees
1
Customers
3,651
Third parties
40
Weak passwords
11%

Latest record dated 2025-07-20 · 69 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 upmc.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • –infonet.upmc.com2025-07-20

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

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

UPMC operates as a major healthcare entity serving the Pittsburgh region with a strong market position as a top-ranked hospital. Its business model focuses on providing comprehensive medical services, patient care, and healthcare resources. The website targets patients, medical professionals, and healthcare consumers, facilitating access to doctors and appointments. The presence of advanced analytics and marketing tools indicates a mature digital marketing strategy. The lack of explicit business registration or VAT information on the site is typical for healthcare providers. The company maintains consistent branding and trust signals such as rankings and professional presentation. No direct partnerships or subsidiaries were identified from the website content.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and integrates cookie consent management, indicating compliance with basic privacy regulations. However, no explicit security headers (e.g., Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options) were detected in the provided data, which could be improved to enhance security. The use of multiple third-party scripts introduces potential risk vectors that require regular auditing. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found in the analyzed content. Incident response and security policy information are not publicly visible, which is a gap in transparency. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could benefit from enhanced header implementation and published security policies.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and verify comprehensive security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  2. Publish clear privacy policy, cookie policy, and terms of service pages accessible from the homepage.
  3. Provide explicit security and incident response contact information to improve transparency and trust.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance accessibility features and compliance to improve user experience for all visitors.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
UPMC
Description
Find a doctor or request an appointment at UPMC, ranked the #1 hospital in Pittsburgh by U.S. News.
Key services
Doctor search, Appointment requests, Healthcare services
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery 3.5.1, FontAwesome 4.3.0, Sitecore.NET 10.3.3, Visual Website Optimizer (VWO), Cookiebot, Invoca, Piwik PRO
Frameworks
Sitecore CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of HTTPS (implied by canonical URL https://www.upmc.com/)
  • Cookie consent mechanism via Cookiebot

Analytics and tracking

Services
Piwik PRO, Visual Website Optimizer (VWO)
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Piwik PRO, Invoca, Visual Website Optimizer (VWO)
Marketing tools
Cookiebot, VWO
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 professional design
  2. No WHOIS data available, possibly due to privacy protection or registry restrictions
  3. Use of multiple third-party analytics and marketing tools
  4. No explicit security headers detected in provided data
  5. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the HTML snippet provided
  6. No privacy policy, cookie policy, or terms of service pages explicitly detected in the provided HTML snippet
  7. No security or incident response contact information found
  8. Website is mobile optimized and uses modern web technologies
  9. No adult or NSFW content detected
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Sitecore CMS version 10.3.3, leveraging jQuery 3.5.1 and FontAwesome 4.3.0 for UI components. It integrates advanced marketing and analytics tools including Visual Website Optimizer for A/B testing, Piwik PRO for analytics, Invoca for call tracking, and Cookiebot for consent management. The site uses asynchronous loading of scripts to optimize performance. Mobile optimization is good with responsive design and adaptive UI elements. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and Open Graph data. Performance is moderate, with some potential for improvement in loading speed and accessibility compliance. Hosting provider details are not explicitly identified. The technical stack reflects a mature enterprise-level healthcare website with room for modernization in security and accessibility.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 73/100Medium30 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with upmc.com. 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 upmc.com.

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.