Skip to main content

Security report for utah.edu

The University of Utah · Education · United States

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

69/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The University of Utah website represents a large, established educational institution with a comprehensive offering of undergraduate and graduate programs, research, healthcare, and athletics. The site targets students, faculty, staff, alumni, and visitors, positioning itself as the flagship university in Utah. The technical infrastructure leverages modern web technologies including Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, and YouTube APIs, indicating a mature digital presence with extensive user engagement and tracking capabilities. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS likely enabled but lacking visible advanced security headers or explicit security policies in the provided data. Privacy compliance is limited due to absence of explicit privacy and cookie policies in the analyzed content. Overall, the website is professional, content-rich, and trustworthy from a business perspective, though domain registration data is incomplete, which slightly impacts trust from a technical domain perspective.

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 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 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. 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 utah.edu

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. 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
30
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
69

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

The University of Utah holds a strong market position as a flagship educational institution in the state of Utah, serving over 30,000 students with a wide range of academic programs and research initiatives. Its business model is centered on education, research, healthcare, and community outreach. The website reflects a well-established brand with consistent messaging and professional design. The presence of multiple analytics and tracking tools suggests a focus on data-driven engagement and marketing. No direct partnerships or subsidiaries were identified from the domain data. The institution's long history (founded in 1850) supports its credibility and market presence.

Security posture

The security posture of the website is moderate. HTTPS is presumably enabled, but no explicit security headers were detected in the provided data. The site uses multiple third-party scripts which could introduce vulnerabilities if not properly managed. There is no evidence of a published security policy, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure program. Privacy compliance is basic, lacking visible GDPR or cookie consent mechanisms. The absence of WHOIS data reduces confidence in domain registration transparency. Overall, the site would benefit from enhanced security headers, explicit privacy and security policies, and improved transparency around incident response.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear consent mechanisms to improve GDPR compliance.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to strengthen security posture.
  3. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to enhance trust and preparedness.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
  5. Investigate and resolve WHOIS data availability issues to improve domain registration transparency and trust.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
The University of Utah
Description
Founded in 1850, The University of Utah is the flagship institution of higher learning in Utah, and offers over 100 undergraduate and more than 90 graduate degree programs to over 30,000 students. As a preeminent research and teaching institution, the University cultivates an academic environment in which the highest standards of intellectual integrity and scholarship are practiced.
Key services
Undergraduate degree programs, Graduate degree programs, Research, Teaching, Healthcare, Athletics, Arts, Outreach
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
YouTube iframe API, Facebook Pixel, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Hotjar, Font Awesome, Owl Carousel
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
60/100

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Hotjar, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, LinkedIn Insight Tag
Marketing tools
Hotjar
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
excellent
User experience
good
Content relevance
excellent
Navigation
good
Professionalism
excellent
Trustworthiness
high
Technical notes

Notes

The website employs a modern technology stack including Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, and YouTube iframe APIs, indicating a mature digital marketing and analytics infrastructure. The use of Font Awesome and Owl Carousel suggests attention to UI/UX design. Performance is moderate with mobile optimization rated good. Accessibility features are basic but present. SEO optimization is good with proper meta tags and social media integration. No CMS or hosting provider information was explicitly detected. The site appears well-maintained with consistent branding and professional 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 utah.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 utah.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.