National Weather Service · Government · United States
Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.
The National Weather Service (NWS) website serves as the official platform for the NOAA National Weather Service, providing comprehensive weather forecasts, alerts, and climate data for the United States. As a government entity under the US Department of Commerce, it holds a primary position in delivering critical weather information to the public, emergency responders, and various agencies. The site offers a wide range of services including local forecasts, severe weather warnings, radar and satellite imagery, and educational resources, targeting a broad audience from general citizens to specialized professionals. Technically, the website employs a mature infrastructure with legacy JavaScript libraries like jQuery and jQuery UI, integrated with modern analytics tools such as Google Tag Manager and DigitalGov Universal Federated Analytics. The site is hosted on government infrastructure, uses HTTPS extensively, and maintains a professional design with clear navigation, though mobile optimization and accessibility features are basic. The content quality is excellent, reflecting the authoritative nature of the service. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and uses secure forms, but lacks some modern security headers and explicit cookie consent mechanisms, which are areas for improvement. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. Privacy compliance is basic, with a comprehensive privacy policy present but no visible cookie consent banner. The WHOIS data is incomplete, likely due to government-managed domain registration practices, but the .gov TLD and organizational affiliations strongly support legitimacy. Overall, the NWS website is a highly credible, authoritative government resource with strong content and a solid security posture. Strategic recommendations include enhancing privacy compliance with cookie consent, updating JavaScript libraries, and implementing additional security headers to further strengthen the site's defenses and user trust.
Scanned
NIS2 Art. 21(2)
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.
5 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.
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.
Prevents clickjacking attacks
What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"
These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.
GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage
What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes
GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies
What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit
SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.
SPF helps prevent email spoofing
What to do: Add SPF record: "v=spf1 include:_spf.yourmailprovider.com ~all"
TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.
SSL certificate expires in 21 days
What to do: Renew SSL certificate before expiration
Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com
This scan found 19 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.
€25per month
Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.
Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. See sample alerts.
€39.90one-time
Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.
Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.
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
Not counted
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.
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
Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.
Leaked records that mention weather.gov, from OffSeq Breach.
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 weather.gov.
Select it in the checkout above.
Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.
Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.
Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.
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
Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.
Reviews of this site
Share your experience with weather.gov. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.
Community rating
No published reviews yet. Be the first to review weather.gov.