Opening the security report for www.ga.berkeley.edu
www.ga.berkeley.edu
Loading the security report for www.ga.berkeley.edu
www.ga.berkeley.edu
Is www.ga.berkeley.edu Safe? Security Score 59/100 | CyStack
www.ga.berkeley.edu
Website Unavailable
UC Berkeley pushes the boundaries of knowledge, challenges convention and expands opportunity to create the leaders of tomorrow.
Industry
Science and Education / Universities and Colleges
Origin
United States
Global rank
#3,455
Rank in United States
#846
Updated at
F59/100
Security level
Low
Data confidence
High
Scope checked
97.3%
The higher the score, the more externally observable protections the system has recorded. This page does not certify that the website is reputable, legitimate, or completely free of vulnerabilities.
Is the website “www.ga.berkeley.edu” safe?
As of September 9, 2026 at 05:19, www.ga.berkeley.edu has a security score of 59/100 (grade F: “Low”). CyStack’s automated assessment recorded 15 issues to review after completing 97.3% of applicable checks. The website owner should address “Certificate matches the website” first, then review the remaining items in order of impact.
Does www.ga.berkeley.edu show known scam, phishing, or malware signals?
At assessment time, CyStack did not find www.ga.berkeley.edu or related infrastructure on any scam, phishing, or malware warning list after checking 5 online reputation sources. This result reflects external observations; it does not guarantee absolute safety or verify the organization’s legal status or reputation.
A valid SSL certificate still does not prove that www.ga.berkeley.edu is safe, legitimate, or free of scam signals. For a more complete assessment, this report also checks phishing and malware, exposed email records, IPs and open ports, subdomains, technologies, and CVEs that may apply to observed versions.
Does www.ga.berkeley.edu use HTTPS, and is its SSL certificate valid?
HTTPS on www.ga.berkeley.edu presented a certificate that was invalid or failed verification. The operator should review its validity dates, domain names, and trust chain.
Data compiled from CyStack cybersecurity monitoring systems
CyStack compiles scan results from its internal cybersecurity monitoring systems, including CyStack VulnScan and CyStack Threat Intelligence, together with publicly available Internet data. The assessment only observes and analyzes information already available; it does not attempt unauthorized access, test passwords, send exploit code, or change or disrupt the assessed system.
These 3 failed checks or warnings have the greatest impact on the result for www.ga.berkeley.edu.
Certificate matches the websiteThe certificate does not match the requested target.Critical
Why it matters
The certificate must list the exact hostname visitors requested in its Subject Alternative Names (SAN). A mismatch produces browser warnings because the certificate may belong to a different service.
What to do
Issue and deploy a certificate whose SAN list includes every public hostname served by this website address.
Diagnostic information
The available certificate evidence was not sufficient to conclude this certificate requirement.
Evidence and check scope
Assessed domain:
www.ga.berkeley.edu
Certificate domain names:
accounts.ocf.berkeley.edu, accounts.ocf.io, death.ocf.berkeley.edu, death.ocf.io, dev-death.ocf.berkeley.edu, dev-death.ocf.io, dev-discourse.ocf.berkeley.edu, dev-discourse.ocf.io, dev-vhost-alias.ocf.berkeley.edu, dev-vhost-alias.ocf.io… and 22 more
Host requested:
www.ga.berkeley.edu
Resolved IPs tested:
169.229.226.23
IP that returned the observed result:
169.229.226.23
Known-exploited CVE candidatesFound 1 known-exploited candidate(s), but the external product fingerprint requires verification.Critical
Why it matters
This check asks whether an applicable CVE candidate also appears in the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog. A positive match means attackers have used that vulnerability in real incidents and warrants urgent investigation, but the installed software still needs to be confirmed as affected.
What to do
Allowed browser content (CSP)The inspected root HTML response does not include a Content-Security-Policy header.High
Why it matters
Content Security Policy (CSP) limits where scripts, styles, frames, and other browser content may come from. A strong policy reduces the impact if an attacker manages to inject content into a page.
What to do
Define only the sources the application needs, test the policy before activating it, and avoid broad wildcard (*) rules, unsafe-inline, and unsafe-eval where possible.
–
Operating system
Public infrastructure and exposed software
Each public IP is grouped with its open services, identified products and any CVEs that may apply to the observed version.
Completed testing of 58 TCP ports
169.229.226.23death.ocf.berkeley.edu
2 open services1 identified products
Hosting or network providerProvider not identified
Network location–
ASN–
80HTTPNginx2 potential CVEs
ProductVersionPotential vulnerabilities
2607:f140:8801::1:23death.ocf.berkeley.edu
0 open services
Hosting or network providerProvider not identified
Network location–
ASN–
No open service was observed on this address in the ports checked.
Have @berkeley.edu email addresses appeared in exposed data or information-stealer (infostealer) logs?
There are currently 1,743 exposed email records matching the berkeley.edu domain. These records may be old or already resolved. The website owner should verify them before resetting passwords or locking related accounts.
Which public IPs, services, and ports does www.ga.berkeley.edu expose?
The assessment observed 2 public IPs and 2 open ports for www.ga.berkeley.edu. An open port is not the same as a vulnerability, but the website owner should keep every public service updated and appropriately restrict access.
How many subdomains of berkeley.edu have been discovered?
The assessment observed 1,094+ public subdomains of berkeley.edu. This list can reveal additional entry points such as APIs, administration systems, or test environments, but it does not mean that every subdomain is risky.
The HTTP/2 protocol allows a denial of service (server resource consumption) because request cancellation can reset many streams quickly, as exploited in the wild in August through October 2023.
When multiple server blocks are configured to share the same IP address and port, an attacker can use session resumption to bypass client certificate authentication requirements on these servers. This vulnerability arises when TLS Session Tickets https://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_ssl_module.html#ssl_session_ticket_key are used and/or the SSL session cache https://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_ssl_module.html#ssl_session_cache are used in the default server and the default server is performing client certificate authentication.
Note: Software versions which have reached End of Technical Support (EoTS) are not evaluated.
The HTTP/2 protocol allows a denial of service (server resource consumption) because request cancellation can reset many streams quickly, as exploited in the wild in August through October 2023.
When multiple server blocks are configured to share the same IP address and port, an attacker can use session resumption to bypass client certificate authentication requirements on these servers. This vulnerability arises when TLS Session Tickets https://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_ssl_module.html#ssl_session_ticket_key are used and/or the SSL session cache https://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_ssl_module.html#ssl_session_cache are used in the default server and the default server is performing client certificate authentication.
Note: Software versions which have reached End of Technical Support (EoTS) are not evaluated.