Skip to main content

Is sc.gov a Scam? Security Check Results - sc.gov Reviews

S

Is sc.gov Safe? Security Analysis for ERROR: The request could not be satisfied

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

GovernmentN/a
Analyzed 8/1/2025Completed 5:38:13 AM
47
Security Score
HIGH RISK

AI Summary

The website sc.gov is a government domain established in 2002, indicating a long-standing presence. However, the current content is inaccessible due to an Amazon CloudFront Web Application Firewall (WAF) blocking access from the user's country, resulting in a 403 error page. This prevents any meaningful extraction of website content, metadata, or business information. The domain WHOIS data shows privacy protection enabled, which is uncommon but may be justified for security reasons in a government context. The lack of DNSSEC and security headers is a minor concern but cannot be fully assessed due to the blocked content. Overall, the site appears legitimate based on domain age and TLD, but the inability to access content limits the analysis.

🧠AI Business Intelligence

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

Business Intelligence

Market & Strategic Analysis

Due to the blocked content, no direct business intelligence can be gathered from the website. The domain suggests a government entity likely serving the state of South Carolina. The lack of visible content or metadata prevents assessment of market positioning, services, or partnerships. The domain's longevity and .gov TLD imply an essential government service provider role.

Security Posture Analysis

Comprehensive Security Assessment

The security posture cannot be fully evaluated due to the blocked content. The presence of a CloudFront WAF indicates some level of security hardening. However, DNSSEC is not enabled, and no security headers were detected in the provided HTML. The domain uses HTTPS as implied by CloudFront usage, but SSL configuration details are unavailable. No vulnerabilities or incident response information can be assessed. Privacy protection in WHOIS is noted but unusual for government domains.

Strategic Recommendations

Priority Actions for Security Improvement

1

Review and adjust CloudFront WAF geo-blocking rules to allow legitimate access for security analysts and users.

Observations

AI-powered comprehensive website and business analysis.

AI-Enhanced Website Analysis

CloudFront Detected

The Amazon CloudFront distribution is configured to block access from your country, resulting in a 403 ERROR page.

Analysis results may be incomplete. For accurate analysis, please contact guard@offseq.com

Business Insights

Content Quality:

poor

Technical Stack

Security Assessment

0

Analytics & Tracking

Advertising & Marketing

Website Quality Assessment

Design Quality:poor
User Experience:poor
Content Relevance:poor
Navigation Clarity:poor
Professionalism:poor
Trustworthiness:low

Key Observations

1

Website content is inaccessible due to CloudFront WAF blocking access from the user's country.

🛡️Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis and recommendations.

Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis

15/100
Score

Missing Strict-Transport-Security header

HIGH

Forces HTTPS connections

Missing X-Frame-Options header

HIGH

Prevents clickjacking attacks

Missing X-Content-Type-Options header

MEDIUM

Prevents MIME type sniffing

Missing Content-Security-Policy header

HIGH

Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

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

50/100
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

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: digital

📧Email Security

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

Email Security

SPF, DKIM, and DMARC validation

85/100
Score

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 a:ciomail.sc.gov mx ip4:167.7.36.2/32 ip4:167.7.36.47/32 include:_spf-dc8.sapsf.com include:spf.protection.outlook.com include:spf-00719202.pphosted.com ~all
DNS Lookups:5/10
Policy:~all
DKIM Selectors Found
Selector:selector2(1296-bit rsa)
Selector:s1(1440-bit rsa)
DMARC Details
Policy:quarantine
Subdomain Policy:none
Aggregate Reports:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com
Forensic Reports:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com

🏆SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis.

SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis

100/100
Score

Partial SSL/TLS Assessment

LOW

Completed 2 of 4 security checks due to time constraints

Certificate Details

Subject:*.sc.gov
Issuer:DigiCert Global G2 TLS RSA SHA256 2020 CA1
Valid Until:11/7/2025 (98 days)
SANs:*.sc.gov, sc.gov, www.sc.gov +54 more

OCSP Status

OCSP Stapling Disabled

📊DNS Health

DNS configuration and security assessment.

DNS Health

DNS configuration and security assessment

0/100
Score
Analysis failed - content could not be retrieved

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 hosted behind Amazon CloudFront, a robust CDN and security platform. The domain is old and uses a government TLD, indicating a stable infrastructure. However, no CMS, frameworks, or scripts are detectable due to the blocked content. Performance, SEO, and accessibility cannot be assessed. The WAF blocking limits technical analysis and suggests a strict security posture that may impact legitimate access.
Analyze Another Website