Skip to main content

Security report for uw.edu

University of Washington · Education · United States

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The University of Washington website serves as the official digital presence of a major public research university in the United States. It provides comprehensive information about academic programs, research initiatives, campus news, and community engagement. The site targets students, faculty, staff, alumni, and the general public, reflecting a broad educational mission. The business model is typical of a public educational institution, relying on tuition, government funding, research grants, and donations. The website is professionally designed with consistent branding and high-quality content, reinforcing its authoritative position in the education sector. Technically, the website is built on WordPress and leverages a modern technology stack including Google Tag Manager, Microsoft Clarity, Facebook Pixel, and other analytics and marketing tools. The site demonstrates good mobile optimization, accessibility, and SEO practices, although performance is moderate. Security is robust with HTTPS enforced and no visible vulnerabilities, but there is room for improvement in implementing security headers and publishing explicit security policies. From a security perspective, the site shows a mature posture with no critical vulnerabilities detected. However, the absence of explicit incident response contacts and vulnerability disclosure policies suggests opportunities to enhance transparency and readiness. Privacy compliance is well addressed with a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service, though cookie consent mechanisms could be improved. Overall, the website is trustworthy, professional, and well-maintained, supporting the university's reputation. The lack of WHOIS data is unusual but likely due to .edu domain registry policies and does not detract from the site's legitimacy. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security headers, publishing vulnerability disclosure information, improving cookie consent, and maintaining regular audits of third-party scripts to sustain security and compliance.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of uw.edu. View the latest report

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

7 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 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

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

Keep watching uw.edu

This scan found 27 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
67
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
60

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 Washington holds a strong market position as a leading public research university with a large and diverse audience including students, faculty, researchers, and alumni. Its competitive advantages include a broad range of academic programs, significant research output, and community engagement. The business model is based on public funding, tuition, and philanthropic support. The website reflects a mature digital presence with extensive partnerships and integrations with major analytics and marketing platforms. Growth indicators include active news updates, research highlights, and community outreach. The partnership ecosystem includes major social media platforms and advertising networks, supporting broad visibility and engagement. Operationally, the university maintains a professional and authoritative online presence consistent with its institutional stature.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a solid security posture with HTTPS enforced and no exposed sensitive data. The use of reputable third-party analytics and marketing scripts is balanced with the need for privacy compliance, as evidenced by the presence of a comprehensive privacy policy. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security reduces the overall security score. There is no visible security.txt or vulnerability disclosure policy, which limits transparency for security researchers. Incident response contact information is not explicitly provided, which could hinder timely reporting of security issues. Overall, the site is secure but could benefit from enhanced security best practices and clearer communication of security policies.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  2. Publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  3. Enhance cookie consent mechanisms to ensure full compliance with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  4. Add explicit incident response contact information on the website to improve security communication.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts to mitigate risks from external dependencies.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
University of Washington
Description
The University of Washington is a public research university providing education, research, and community services. The website highlights academic programs, research initiatives, campus news, and community engagement.
Key services
Academic programs, Research initiatives, Student services, Community engagement, Online education
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Microsoft Clarity, Facebook Pixel, Crazy Egg, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Siteimprove Analytics, jQuery, Backbone.js, Underscore.js
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
Web
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 security and analytics scripts from reputable sources

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Microsoft Clarity, Siteimprove Analytics, Crazy Egg, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Facebook Pixel
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
DoubleClick
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, Microsoft Clarity, Crazy Egg, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Siteimprove Analytics
Marketing tools
Crazy Egg, Microsoft Clarity
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a well-established educational institution site with comprehensive content.
  2. No signs of blocking or WAF interference detected.
  3. Extensive use of third-party analytics and marketing tools.
  4. No explicit contact emails or phone numbers found in the main HTML content.
  5. Privacy and terms policies are present and accessible.
  6. No security.txt or explicit vulnerability disclosure policy found.
  7. WHOIS data is missing or inaccessible, which is unusual but may be due to .edu domain registry specifics.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress with a modern front-end leveraging jQuery, Backbone.js, and Underscore.js. It integrates multiple analytics and marketing tools such as Google Tag Manager, Microsoft Clarity, Facebook Pixel, Crazy Egg, and LinkedIn Insight Tag. The site uses responsive design and accessibility best practices, providing a good user experience across devices. Performance is moderate, likely due to the number of third-party scripts and rich media content. Hosting details are not explicitly identified, but the site uses HTTPS with a strong SSL configuration. Technical debt appears low, but opportunities exist to optimize performance and security headers. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a robust and professional digital presence suitable for a large educational institution.
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. 60/100Medium36 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with uw.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 uw.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.