Skip to main content

Security report for analytica.lv

Analytica · Technology · Latvia

Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Analytica is a small information security consulting firm based in Latvia, offering a range of services including penetration testing, information security consulting, training, load testing, SOC, and application monitoring. The website presents a professional and consistent brand image with clear service offerings targeted at businesses seeking to improve their information security posture. The technical infrastructure is based on the Hugo static site generator, indicating a modern and lightweight approach to web delivery. The site is mobile optimized and well-structured, though accessibility features are basic. From a security perspective, the website uses HTTPS and does not expose sensitive data or vulnerable libraries. However, there is a lack of visible security headers and no published privacy, cookie, or incident response policies, which are important for compliance and trust. Contact information is limited to a single obfuscated email address, with no phone numbers or physical addresses provided. WHOIS data could not be retrieved due to query limits, limiting the ability to fully verify domain legitimacy. Overall, the site demonstrates a moderate security posture with room for improvement in privacy compliance, contact transparency, and security best practices. The business appears credible within its niche but would benefit from enhanced trust signals and compliance documentation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 100 · Critical
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

9 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • Critical

      EU business without adequate privacy measures

      EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

      What to do: Implement comprehensive GDPR compliance including privacy policy, cookie consent, and data protection measures

    • High

      No Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

    • 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

  2. 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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

    • High

      Missing Content-Security-Policy header

      Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

      What to do: Implement a Content-Security-Policy appropriate for your application

      • ASVS V3.4.3
      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Content-Security-Policy: default-src 'self'; form-action 'self'; base-uri 'self'; object-src 'none';…

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching analytica.lv

This scan found 25 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. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

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
52
Security headers
30
Email security
70
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
60

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

Analytica operates in the technology sector, focusing on information security consulting and related services. The company targets businesses that require security assessments, training, and operational security center services. Their business model is service-oriented, relying on expertise and consulting engagements. The market position is that of an agile, experienced team with a proven track record, though the lack of visible certifications or client testimonials limits external validation. The company was founded in 2019 and appears to be a small-sized entity. There is no evidence of parent or subsidiary companies. The website content is relevant and professional, supporting a credible business presence in the Latvian market.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS, which is mandatory for secure communications. However, the absence of security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options reduces the overall security posture. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the content. The lack of published security policies, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms indicates gaps in security governance and transparency. The site does not appear to use analytics or tracking scripts, which reduces privacy risks but also limits insight into user behavior. Overall, the security maturity is moderate but could be significantly improved by adopting standard security headers and publishing relevant policies.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce security headers including Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve GDPR compliance and user trust.
  3. Add clear incident response and vulnerability disclosure information to demonstrate security governance and readiness.
  4. Provide additional contact information such as phone numbers and physical addresses to improve business credibility and user confidence.
  5. Consider obtaining and displaying relevant security certifications to strengthen market position and trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Analytica
Description
Information Security Consulting, Services and Operations Center.
Key services
Penetration Testing, Information Security Consulting, Training, Load Testing, SOC, Application Monitoring
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Hugo 0.54.0, JavaScript
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS usage assumed (site URL is https)
  • No visible exposed sensitive data
  • No vulnerable libraries detected

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no WAF or blocking detected
  2. WHOIS data unavailable due to query limit error
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the site
  4. Contact information limited to one obfuscated email address
  5. No phone numbers or physical addresses found
  6. No social media links detected
  7. Website uses Hugo static site generator
  8. Services focus on information security consulting and related offerings
  9. No visible security certifications or badges
  10. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information present
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using the Hugo static site generator, which provides a fast and lightweight platform. The HTML content is well-structured with appropriate meta tags for SEO and Open Graph data for social media sharing. The site is mobile optimized and has a clear navigation structure. No external analytics or tracking scripts were detected, indicating a privacy-conscious approach. However, the absence of security headers and limited accessibility features suggest areas for technical improvement. Hosting provider details are not discernible from the content. Performance is moderate, likely benefiting from static site delivery but could be enhanced with further optimization.
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 analytica.lv. 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 analytica.lv.

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.