Skip to main content

Security report for anivasia.lv

SIA ANIVA · Hospitality · Latvia

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

58/100

Risk levelMedium

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

SIA ANIVA is a Latvian catering company with over 25 years of experience providing a wide range of food services including institutional catering, cafes, banquets, and outdoor event trade. The company serves educational institutions and private clients with a professional team of over 250 employees. The website is built on WordPress and uses common libraries such as jQuery, Bootstrap, and Google Analytics for tracking. The site is well-structured, mobile-optimized, and provides clear contact information and business details. However, WHOIS data is unavailable due to query limits, limiting domain trust verification. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS usage but lacks visible security headers and cookie consent mechanisms. Overall, the site presents a professional and trustworthy business presence with room for security and privacy improvements.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
10/ 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

8 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 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
    • High

      Missing X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

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

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

Keep watching anivasia.lv

This scan found 26 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
62
Security headers
30
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
10
Average
58

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

ANIVA holds a solid position in the Latvian hospitality sector, focusing on catering services for educational institutions and events. Their business model revolves around service provision with a strong emphasis on quality and compliance with local regulations. The company leverages public procurement opportunities and maintains a large professional workforce. The website supports their market presence with detailed service descriptions and contact channels but lacks advanced marketing or social media integration. The absence of WHOIS transparency is common but slightly reduces trust. No partnerships or subsidiaries are indicated on the site.

Security posture

The website uses HTTPS and standard security practices but lacks advanced security headers and explicit security policies. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, which could be improved to enhance trust and compliance. The absence of a cookie consent mechanism is a GDPR compliance gap. No known vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the content. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could benefit from implementing recommended headers, policies, and compliance features.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a cookie consent banner and detailed cookie policy to improve GDPR compliance.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to enhance transparency and trust.
  4. Conduct regular security audits and update all third-party libraries to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Consider WHOIS privacy disclosure or verification to improve domain trustworthiness.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
SIA ANIVA
Registration number
50003115551
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
SIA ANIVA
Description
ANIVA is a Latvian company providing professional catering services since 1993, specializing in public procurement and catering for educational institutions, cafes, bistros, banquets, and outdoor trade events. They have a team of over 250 professionals serving more than 70 structural units.
Key services
Catering in educational institutions, Cafe and bistro services, Banquet service, Food delivery to organizations and private clients, Outdoor trade at events, Confectionery products
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery 3.2.1, Bootstrap 3.3.7, Popper.js 1.12.9, Google Fonts (Roboto, Allura), Slick Carousel, Fancybox, Font Awesome 4.7.0, Yoast SEO plugin
Frameworks
WordPress 6.0.9
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
65/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS usage implied by canonical URL and external scripts loaded over HTTPS

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

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 blocking or WAF challenges
  2. Content is in Latvian and English with focus on catering services
  3. No forms detected on the homepage; interactive scripts relate to product selection and order calculation
  4. No cookie consent banner or explicit cookie policy found
  5. Contact information is prominently displayed in header and footer
  6. No social media links are present
  7. Website uses standard WordPress plugins and libraries
  8. No visible security headers in HTML source
  9. Privacy policy page exists and is linked in footer
  10. No terms of service or security policy pages found
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 6.0.9 with a modern but somewhat dated tech stack including jQuery 3.2.1 and Bootstrap 3.3.7. It uses popular plugins like Yoast SEO and Slick Carousel for enhanced user experience. Performance is moderate with autoplay sliders and multiple external scripts. Mobile optimization is good, but accessibility features are basic. SEO is supported by meta tags and structured data (JSON-LD). Hosting provider details are not disclosed. The site lacks advanced security headers and cookie consent mechanisms, indicating areas for technical improvement.
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 anivasia.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 anivasia.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.