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's official website serves as a comprehensive portal for students, faculty, staff, alumni, and the public, providing detailed information on academics, research, admissions, news, and campus resources. The site reflects the institution's status as a leading public research university in the United States, with a strong emphasis on education and community engagement. The website's content is well-structured, professionally designed, and highly relevant to its target audience. Technically, the site is built on WordPress CMS and leverages a modern technology stack including jQuery, Backbone.js, and multiple analytics and marketing tools such as Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Microsoft Clarity, and Crazy Egg. The site demonstrates good mobile optimization, accessibility, and SEO practices, although performance is moderate, likely due to the extensive use of third-party scripts. From a security perspective, the website enforces HTTPS and avoids exposing sensitive data in its HTML content. However, there is a lack of visible security headers and no public security or incident response policies detected. The WHOIS data is unavailable, which is typical for .edu domains, but this reduces transparency slightly. Privacy compliance is adequate with a comprehensive privacy policy, though no explicit cookie consent mechanism was detected. Overall, the website is trustworthy, professional, and safe for general audiences. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security headers, implementing a cookie consent mechanism, publishing a security.txt file, and auditing third-party scripts regularly to maintain security and compliance.

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

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 operates as a major public educational institution with a broad market presence in higher education and research. Its business model centers on providing academic programs, conducting research, and engaging with the community. The university targets students, researchers, faculty, and alumni, supported by a robust digital ecosystem including multiple campus and service domains. The institution benefits from strong brand recognition, extensive partnerships, and a comprehensive online presence. Growth indicators include active research initiatives and community programs. The university's operations are supported by a mature digital infrastructure and a wide range of services accessible through its main and related domains.

Security posture

The website exhibits a mature security posture with HTTPS enforced and no visible exposure of sensitive data. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security is a gap that could be addressed to enhance protection against common web attacks. The lack of a public security policy or incident response contact reduces transparency and may impact incident handling efficiency. The extensive use of third-party analytics and marketing scripts introduces potential risk vectors that require ongoing monitoring. Privacy compliance is generally good, but the absence of a cookie consent mechanism may pose regulatory risks in certain jurisdictions. Overall, the security posture is solid but could be improved with enhanced headers, documented policies, and better privacy controls.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  2. Deploy a cookie consent banner or mechanism to comply with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  3. Publish a security.txt file to facilitate vulnerability disclosure and improve incident response transparency.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts to mitigate risks from external dependencies.
  5. Develop and publish a formal security policy and incident response plan accessible to users and stakeholders.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
University of Washington
Description
University of Washington official website providing information about academics, research, admissions, news, events, and campus resources.
Key services
Academic programs, Research initiatives, Admissions and enrollment, Student services, Community engagement
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, jQuery, Backbone.js, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Microsoft Clarity, Crazy Egg, Siteimprove Analytics, LinkedIn Insight Tag, DoubleClick Floodlight, Ensighten
Frameworks
WordPress CMS
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 with async loading

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via GTM), Microsoft Clarity, Crazy Egg, Siteimprove Analytics, LinkedIn Insight
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
DoubleClick
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, Microsoft Clarity, Crazy Egg, LinkedIn Insight
Marketing tools
Ensighten
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professionally maintained university homepage.
  2. Content is rich, relevant, and well-structured.
  3. Strong use of official branding and social media presence.
  4. No signs of phishing, malware, or suspicious content.
  5. Extensive use of third-party analytics and marketing tools.
  6. No visible contact emails or phone numbers explicitly labeled as company contacts.
  7. No explicit cookie consent mechanism detected.
  8. WHOIS data is not publicly available, typical for .edu domains.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is powered by WordPress CMS with a modern JavaScript stack including jQuery and Backbone.js. It integrates multiple analytics and marketing tools such as Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Microsoft Clarity, and Crazy Egg, which provide extensive user tracking and marketing capabilities. The site uses asynchronous script loading to optimize performance, though the overall load time is moderate due to the volume of third-party resources. Mobile optimization and accessibility are well implemented, supporting a broad user base. SEO practices are solid with proper meta tags and structured content. Opportunities exist to improve performance by optimizing third-party script usage and enhancing security headers to reduce technical risk.
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. 60/100Medium35 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.