Skip to main content

Is frederickcountymd.gov a Scam? Security Check Results - Frederick County Government Reviews

frederickcountymd.gov favicon

Is frederickcountymd.gov Safe? Security Analysis for Frederick County Government

Check if frederickcountymd.gov is a scam or legitimate. Free security scan and reviews.

GovernmentUnited Stateslarge
jQuery 2.2.4jQuery UI 1.14.1AlpineJS 3.14.1Google Tag ManagerSiteimprove Analytics+2 more
Analyzed 9/5/2025Completed 11:38:13 PM
60
Security Score
MEDIUM RISK

AI Summary

Frederick County Government operates an official website serving residents, businesses, and visitors with comprehensive information and services related to local government operations. The site provides access to government departments, business resources, news updates, event calendars, and contact information, positioning itself as a key digital portal for the county. The website targets a broad audience including local citizens, businesses, and government employees, supporting transparency and community engagement. Technically, the website leverages a CivicPlus CMS platform with modern JavaScript libraries such as jQuery and AlpineJS, alongside analytics tools including Google Tag Manager, Siteimprove Analytics, and Microsoft Application Insights. The site demonstrates good mobile responsiveness and basic accessibility features, though there is room for improvement in SEO and advanced accessibility compliance. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS and implements anti-forgery tokens in forms, but lacks DNSSEC and explicit security headers, which are recommended to enhance security posture. Privacy compliance is basic, with a privacy policy present but no cookie consent mechanism detected, indicating potential gaps in GDPR compliance. The domain is a mature .gov domain with privacy protection justified for government use, supporting legitimacy. Overall, the website is professional, trustworthy, and functional, with moderate technical and security maturity. Strategic improvements in security headers, DNSSEC, and privacy compliance would strengthen the site’s security and regulatory posture.

Detected Technologies

jQuery 2.2.4jQuery UI 1.14.1AlpineJS 3.14.1Google Tag ManagerSiteimprove AnalyticsMicrosoft Application InsightsCivicPlus CMS

🧠AI Business Intelligence

Technology stack, business insights, and market analysis powered by AI.

Business Intelligence

Market & Strategic Analysis

Frederick County Government's website reflects its role as a local government entity providing essential services and information to its community. The site’s market position is that of an authoritative source for county-related information, with competitive advantages including official .gov domain status and integration with multiple communication channels such as social media. The business model is service-oriented, focusing on public administration and community engagement rather than revenue generation. The target customer segments include residents, local businesses, and visitors seeking government services or information. Growth indicators include active news updates and event calendars. The partnership ecosystem includes CivicPlus as the CMS provider and various analytics and accessibility service providers. Operationally, the website supports transparency and accessibility, key to government digital services.

Extracted Contact Information

Marketing Intelligence Data

Phone Numbers (1)

301*******

Security Posture Analysis

Comprehensive Security Assessment

The security maturity of the Frederick County Government website is moderate. HTTPS is enforced, and anti-forgery tokens are used to protect forms against CSRF attacks. However, the absence of DNSSEC and lack of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options represent areas for improvement. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. Incident response and vulnerability disclosure policies are not publicly available, which could hinder rapid response to security incidents. Privacy compliance is partial, with a privacy policy present but no cookie consent mechanism, potentially exposing the site to GDPR compliance risks. Overall, the site demonstrates a baseline security posture appropriate for a government website but should enhance controls and transparency.

Strategic Recommendations

Priority Actions for Security Improvement

1

Enable DNSSEC on the domain to protect against DNS spoofing and improve DNS security.

Observations

AI-powered comprehensive website and business analysis.

AI-Enhanced Website Analysis

Business Insights

Company:

Frederick County Government

Description:

Official website of Frederick County, Maryland government providing information and services to residents, businesses, and visitors.

Key Services:
Government informationDepartments and servicesBusiness resourcesNews and alertsEvent calendarsContact and support
Content Quality:

good

Branding:

consistent

Technical Stack

Technologies:
jQuery 2.2.4jQuery UI 1.14.1AlpineJS 3.14.1Google Tag ManagerSiteimprove AnalyticsMicrosoft Application InsightsCivicPlus CMS
Frameworks:
CivicPlus CMS
Performance:

moderate

Mobile:

good

Accessibility:

basic

SEO:

basic

Security Assessment

Security Score:
75/100
Best Practices:
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Anti-forgery token implemented in forms
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security status flags in domain

Analytics & Tracking

Services:
Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager)Siteimprove AnalyticsMicrosoft Application Insights
Tracking Level:moderate
Privacy Compliance:basic

Advertising & Marketing

Tracking Pixels:
Siteimprove AnalyticsMicrosoft Application Insights
Marketing Tools:
Siteimprove Analytics
Transparency Level:basic

Website Quality Assessment

Design Quality:good
User Experience:good
Content Relevance:good
Navigation Clarity:good
Professionalism:good
Trustworthiness:high

Key Observations

1

Official government website with comprehensive public service information.

🛡️Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis and recommendations.

Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis

40/100
Score

Missing Strict-Transport-Security header

HIGH

Forces HTTPS connections

Missing X-Frame-Options header

HIGH

Prevents clickjacking attacks

Missing X-XSS-Protection header

MEDIUM

Legacy XSS protection (deprecated but still recommended)

Missing Referrer-Policy header

LOW

Controls referrer information sent with requests

Missing Permissions-Policy header

MEDIUM

Controls browser features and APIs

Sensitive data may be cached

LOW

Cache-Control header should include "no-store" for sensitive pages

👤GDPR Compliance

Privacy and data protection assessment under GDPR regulations.

GDPR Compliance

Privacy and data protection assessment

35/100
Score

No Privacy Policy found

HIGH

GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

No Cookie Policy found

HIGH

GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

No Cookie Consent Banner found

HIGH

GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

Third-party services without privacy policy

HIGH

Detected services: Google Analytics, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, Google APIs

GDPR Compliance Analysis

Privacy Policy0% confidence
Cookie Policy0% confidence
Contact Information Found90% confidence
phone

🛡️NIS2 Compliance

Network & Information Security Directive compliance assessment.

NIS2 Compliance

Network & Information Security Directive

2/100
Score

No information security framework found

HIGH

NIS2 requires documented cybersecurity and information security measures

No vulnerability disclosure policy

MEDIUM

NIS2 encourages coordinated vulnerability disclosure

No security policy documentation found

HIGH

NIS2 requires documented cybersecurity governance and risk management

No incident response procedures found

HIGH

NIS2 requires documented incident response and business continuity plans

No business continuity planning found

MEDIUM

NIS2 emphasizes operational resilience and business continuity

No security contact information

HIGH

NIS2 requires clear incident reporting channels

No vulnerability reporting mechanism

MEDIUM

Clear vulnerability reporting supports coordinated disclosure

No NIS2 reference found

LOW

Consider explicitly mentioning NIS2 compliance efforts

Critical sector without clear security compliance

HIGH

Detected sectors: energy, transport, health, digital

📧Email Security

SPF, DKIM, and DMARC validation and email security assessment.

Email Security

SPF, DKIM, and DMARC validation

70/100
Score

Complex SPF record

LOW

Too many include statements can cause lookup limits

DMARC not enforcing

MEDIUM

DMARC policy is set to "none"

No BIMI Record

LOW

BIMI displays brand logos in email clients

No MTA-STS Policy

MEDIUM

MTA-STS enforces TLS for email delivery

No TLS-RPT Record

LOW

TLS-RPT provides reporting for email TLS issues

SPF
Sender Policy Framework
DKIM
DomainKeys Identified Mail
DMARC
Domain-based Message Authentication
MX Records
Mail Exchange Records
BIMI
Brand Indicators
MTA-STS
Mail Transfer Agent Security
TLS-RPT
TLS Reporting
DNSSEC
DNS Security
SPF Details
Record:
v=spf1 ip4:199.248.201.240/32 ip4:199.248.201.40/32 include:spf-0050c101.pphosted.com include:spf.protection.outlook.com include:_spf.psm.knowbe4.com include:usb._netblocks.mimecast.com include:amazonses.com -all
DNS Lookups:5/10
Policy:-all
DKIM Selectors Found
Selector:k2(1416-bit rsa)
Selector:s1(1440-bit rsa)
DMARC Details
Policy:none
Aggregate Reports:dmarc@frederickcountymd.gov
Forensic Reports:dmarc@frederickcountymd.gov

🏆SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis.

SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis

72/100
Score

Weak Protocols Supported

HIGH

Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

OCSP Stapling Not Enabled

LOW

OCSP stapling improves performance and privacy

Certificate Transparency Not Implemented

LOW

Certificate is not logged in Certificate Transparency logs

SSL Certificate Expires Within 90 Days

MEDIUM

SSL certificate expires in 88 days

Partial SSL/TLS Assessment

LOW

Completed 3 of 4 security checks due to time constraints

Protocol Support

TLSv1.3TLSv1.2TLSv1.1

OCSP Status

OCSP Stapling Disabled

📊DNS Health

DNS configuration and security assessment.

DNS Health

DNS configuration and security assessment

75/100
Score

DNSSEC Not Enabled

MEDIUM

DNSSEC is not configured for this domain

CAA Records Not Configured

LOW

Certificate Authority Authorization (CAA) records not found

Domain Delete Lock Not Enabled

LOW

Domain can be deleted without additional verification

DMARC Policy Set to None

LOW

DMARC is configured but not enforcing any policy

Domain Registration Details

Domain Age
16 years(mature)
Expiry Risk
low(167 days)
Protection Level
basicDNSSEC OFF
Suspicious Indicators Detected
  • Privacy/proxy registration detected

DNS Records

A Records:208.90.188.189
Name Servers:
ns10.dnsmadeeasy.com
ns11.dnsmadeeasy.com
ns12.dnsmadeeasy.com
ns13.dnsmadeeasy.comDNS only
ns14.dnsmadeeasy.comDNS only
ns15.dnsmadeeasy.comDNS only
MX Records:
10: usb-smtp-inbound-1.mimecast.com
10: usb-smtp-inbound-2.mimecast.com
SOA:Serial: 2009010800, TTL: 180s

DNSSEC Status

DNSSEC Not Enabled

DNS Performance

Resolution Time:62ms

SPF Analysis

SPF Record:
v=spf1 ip4:199.248.201.240/32 ip4:199.248.201.40/32 include:spf-0050c101.pphosted.com include:spf.protection.outlook.com include:_spf.psm.knowbe4.com include:usb._netblocks.mimecast.com include:amazonses.com -all

Network Security

Port scanning and network exposure analysis.

Network Security

Port scanning and network exposure analysis

100/100
Score

Good Network Security Posture

LOW

No unnecessary services detected on common risky ports

🔧Technical Analysis

Detailed technical findings and analysis from AI assessment.

Technical Analysis

Comprehensive security assessment findings

Additional Findings

The website is built on the CivicPlus CMS platform, utilizing jQuery, jQuery UI, and AlpineJS for frontend interactivity. It integrates Google Tag Manager, Siteimprove Analytics, and Microsoft Application Insights for analytics and monitoring. The site is mobile responsive with good navigation clarity and consistent branding. Performance is moderate, with potential optimization opportunities in script loading and caching. Accessibility is basic, with some ARIA roles and labels present but no advanced features detected. SEO is basic, with meta tags present but limited structured data or Open Graph tags. The hosting and DNS setup is standard, with room for security enhancements such as DNSSEC. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a stable and functional government website but could benefit from modernization and security hardening.
Analyze Another Website