Skip to main content

Security report for wisconsin.edu

Universities of Wisconsin · Education · United States

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

71/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Universities of Wisconsin website represents a comprehensive public higher education system comprising 13 universities across Wisconsin. The site offers extensive information about academic programs, student resources, financial aid, and online learning opportunities, targeting prospective and current students, faculty, and community members. The website is professionally designed with consistent branding and clear navigation, reflecting the institution's stature and mission. Technically, the site is built on WordPress 6.8.1, leveraging modern web technologies including jQuery, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, and a CDN via Amazon CloudFront for performance optimization. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, with good SEO practices and privacy compliance mechanisms such as cookie consent banners and detailed privacy policies. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and employs standard security best practices, though explicit security headers are not fully confirmed. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. However, the absence of a published security policy or incident response contact is noted as an area for improvement. Overall, the website is trustworthy, well-maintained, and aligned with the expectations for a major public university system. The lack of WHOIS data is typical for .edu domains and does not detract from the site's legitimacy. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security header implementation, publishing security policies, and establishing a vulnerability disclosure program.

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

4 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

  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 wisconsin.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
72
Security headers
45
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
71

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 Universities of Wisconsin hold a dominant position as the state's primary public higher education provider, serving over 164,000 students. Their business model focuses on delivering accessible education, research, and community engagement funded by state investment and tuition. The system's 23:1 return on investment highlights its economic impact. The website supports a broad audience including students at various stages, veterans, families, and counselors, indicating a comprehensive outreach strategy. Partnerships and online education offerings suggest adaptability and growth orientation. The presence of official social media channels and detailed program information supports strong brand presence and market positioning.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, privacy and cookie policies, and no visible vulnerabilities or sensitive data exposure. The use of third-party analytics and advertising tools is balanced with user consent mechanisms. However, the absence of explicit security headers and a formal security or incident response policy limits the security maturity level. No dedicated contact channels for security incidents or vulnerability disclosures were found, which is a gap in incident response readiness. Overall, the site is secure for general users but could improve transparency and preparedness for security events.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and verify comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and incident response procedures.
  3. Establish and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Enhance accessibility features to meet or exceed WCAG standards for broader compliance.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and plugins to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Universities of Wisconsin
Description
The Universities of Wisconsin comprise 13 public universities across the state offering world-class education, research, and outreach. They serve approximately 164,400 students and provide a 23:1 return on state investment. The system contributes to Wisconsin's culture and economy through research, patents, and intellectual energy.
Key services
Academic programs, Online education, Student resources, Financial aid and employment, Research and outreach
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.8.1, jQuery 3.7.1, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, StackAdapt events.js, CookieYes consent banner
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
Web
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of security and privacy policies
  • Cookie consent mechanism
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No vulnerable libraries detected

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager, Siteimprove Analytics, Facebook Pixel
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
StackAdapt
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel
Marketing tools
StackAdapt
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and navigation.
  2. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.
  3. Uses modern web technologies and CDN for performance.
  4. Strong branding and consistent user experience.
  5. Privacy and cookie policies are present and implemented.
  6. No direct phone numbers or physical addresses found in footer or main content.
  7. No explicit security or incident response policies published.
  8. WHOIS data unavailable, typical for .edu domains with restricted WHOIS access.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress CMS platform with version 6.8.1, utilizing jQuery 3.7.1 and various third-party scripts for analytics and advertising. Hosting is supported by Amazon CloudFront CDN, ensuring fast content delivery and scalability. The site employs responsive design and accessibility best practices, with well-structured HTML and CSS. Performance is optimized with compressed CSS and JavaScript assets. The technical stack is current with no deprecated or vulnerable libraries detected. Opportunities exist to improve security header implementation and formalize security documentation 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

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with wisconsin.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 wisconsin.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.