Skip to main content

Security report for uw.org

United Way of Salt Lake · Non-profit · United States

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

59/100

Risk levelMedium

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

United Way of Salt Lake is a well-established non-profit organization focused on improving lives through education, financial stability, and health initiatives in the Salt Lake community. Founded in 1904, it has a strong market position as a trusted community partner offering key services such as early childhood development, educational achievement programs, and health and financial stability support. The organization engages donors, volunteers, and advocates to drive measurable social change. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with a modern tech stack including Google Analytics, Tag Manager, and various marketing and tracking tools. The site is mobile optimized and professionally designed, providing a good user experience and clear navigation. Security posture is solid with HTTPS enforced and spam protection via reCAPTCHA, though improvements are recommended in DNSSEC and security headers. Privacy compliance is partially met with a comprehensive privacy policy but lacks a cookie consent mechanism. Overall, the domain registration data aligns well with the organization's claims, indicating legitimacy and trustworthiness.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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. 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.

    • Critical

      Unable to retrieve SSL certificate

      Could not establish secure connection to retrieve certificate information

      What to do: Check if the server is accessible and SSL/TLS is properly configured

  2. 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';…

  3. 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

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

Keep watching uw.org

This scan found 20 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
0
Security headers
30
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
59

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 organization operates in the non-profit sector with a focus on community development and social services. Its business model relies on donations, corporate giving, volunteer engagement, and advocacy. The website reflects a mature digital presence with integration of multiple analytics and marketing platforms to support fundraising and outreach efforts. Partnerships with local services like 211 Utah and Promise Partnership enhance its community impact. The organization's long history and consistent branding contribute to strong trust indicators. Growth is supported by active event promotion, donor networks, and community participation programs.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security maturity level. HTTPS is properly implemented, and clientTransferProhibited domain status protects against unauthorized transfers. Use of Google reCAPTCHA on forms helps mitigate spam and abuse. However, the absence of DNSSEC and some recommended security headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) indicates room for improvement. No incident response or security policy information is publicly available, which could be enhanced to improve transparency and readiness. The extensive use of third-party scripts and tracking pixels necessitates regular security audits to prevent vulnerabilities.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement a cookie consent banner to comply with GDPR and improve privacy transparency.
  3. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to harden the website against common attacks.
  4. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information to improve trust and preparedness.
  5. Regularly review and update third-party scripts and tracking tools to minimize security risks.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
United Way of Salt Lake
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
United Way of Salt Lake
Description
United Way of Salt Lake has served and strengthened the greater Salt Lake community. Established in 1904 as the Salt Lake Charity Association, it's original mission was to help the poor, discourage panhandling, and coordinate various programs. The historic community chest with a broad charitable mission has transformed into an agent for social change. Today, United Way of Salt Lake is pursuing lasting social change on some of the toughest challenges we face, including poverty, poor health, and lagging educational achievement.
Key services
Early Childhood Development, Grade Level Achievement, Graduation and Career Support, Health and Financial Stability, Community Research Participation, Volunteer and Advocacy Programs, Donor and Corporate Giving Programs
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, Stripe Payments, Fundraise Up, Cloudflare DNS
Frameworks
Yoast SEO, Google Site Kit
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • ClientTransferProhibited domain status
  • Use of reCAPTCHA on forms
  • No exposed sensitive data found in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, MonsterInsights, Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Twitter Universal Website Tag, Moat Analytics, Pardot
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
Taboola, Outbrain, PulsePoint, Twitter Ads, Facebook Ads
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Twitter Universal Website Tag, Moat Analytics, Pardot
Marketing tools
MonsterInsights, Fundraise Up
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professionally maintained non-profit organization site
  2. Uses multiple third-party marketing and analytics tools
  3. No explicit privacy cookie consent mechanism detected
  4. Security headers could be improved
  5. DNSSEC not enabled
  6. Contact information is clearly provided
  7. Multiple social media channels linked
  8. Forms use Google reCAPTCHA for spam protection
  9. Domain WHOIS data is consistent and trustworthy
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with a modern and well-maintained technology stack including Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, and Stripe Payments integration. The site uses Cloudflare for DNS services but does not have DNSSEC enabled. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and accessibility features. SEO is enhanced by Yoast SEO plugin and structured data (JSON-LD) for organization and webpage metadata. The site uses asynchronous loading for many scripts to improve load times. Some minor technical debt is noted in missing security headers and lack of cookie consent mechanisms. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports the organization's digital goals effectively but could benefit from security and privacy enhancements.
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 uw.org. 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.org.

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.