Skip to main content

Security report for aronaspagasts.lv

Aronas pagasta pārvalde · Government · Latvia

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Email security and 2 other checks.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Aronas pagasts website serves as the official local government portal for the Aronas parish in Latvia. It provides residents and visitors with information about the parish, local news, cultural events, and administrative contacts. The site is primarily informational and targets local community members. The business model is typical for a government entity, focusing on public service and community engagement. Technically, the website uses legacy technologies such as jQuery and Fancybox for UI enhancements. The site structure is basic with limited modern web development practices. There is no evidence of a modern CMS or advanced frameworks. Performance and mobile optimization are basic but functional. SEO and accessibility features are minimal. From a security perspective, the site lacks visible HTTPS enforcement and security headers, which are critical for protecting user data and ensuring trust. No privacy policy or terms of service pages are present, and cookie usage is mentioned without a consent mechanism, indicating gaps in privacy compliance. No contact emails or phone numbers are explicitly provided, limiting user support and transparency. Overall, the website is functional for its purpose but requires significant improvements in security, privacy compliance, and technical modernization to meet current standards and user expectations.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
40/ 100 · High
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

  2. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

  3. 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"

    • 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 aronaspagasts.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
62
Security headers
20
Email security
60
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
40
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

The website represents a small local government entity serving the Aronas parish community. Its market position is localized with no commercial intent. The key services include dissemination of local news, event announcements, and administrative information. The business model is public service-oriented, funded by government resources. There is no indication of revenue streams or partnerships. The target audience is local residents and visitors interested in parish affairs. Growth indicators and strategic partnerships are not evident from the website content. The site lacks advanced digital engagement tools or e-government services, indicating potential for future development.

Security posture

The current security posture is basic and exhibits several weaknesses. The absence of HTTPS enforcement and security headers exposes users to potential data interception and clickjacking attacks. The lack of privacy and cookie consent policies indicates non-compliance with GDPR and related regulations. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, limiting transparency and readiness. The site does not appear to use vulnerable libraries but relies on outdated technologies. Overall, the security maturity is low, and improvements are necessary to protect user data and enhance trust.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate and enforce secure connections site-wide.
  2. Add comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with explicit user consent mechanisms to comply with GDPR.
  3. Deploy security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection to mitigate common web attacks.
  4. Publish clear contact information including emails and phone numbers for administrative and security incident reporting.
  5. Modernize the website technology stack and improve mobile responsiveness and accessibility to enhance user experience.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Aronas pagasta pārvalde
Description
Aronas pagasts local government website providing information about the parish, local news, events, administration, and community services.
Key services
Local news and announcements, Information about the parish, Contact information for local administration, Information on local events and cultural activities
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Fancybox
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
40/100
Good practices seen
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No visible vulnerable libraries

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a local government portal for Aronas pagasts, Latvia.
  2. Content is primarily in Latvian language.
  3. No privacy policy or terms of service pages found.
  4. Cookie usage is mentioned but no explicit consent mechanism is implemented.
  5. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the content.
  6. No social media links detected.
  7. Uses jQuery and Fancybox libraries for UI.
  8. No modern CMS or frameworks detected.
  9. No security headers or HTTPS enforcement information available.
  10. WHOIS data unavailable due to query limit error.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses legacy JavaScript libraries like jQuery and Fancybox for UI interactions. There is no evidence of a modern CMS or frameworks such as WordPress, Drupal, or React. The HTML structure is basic with some responsive CSS but limited accessibility features. Performance appears moderate but could benefit from optimization. No analytics or tracking scripts were detected, indicating minimal user data collection. Hosting provider and SSL configuration details are unavailable. The site lacks modern SEO optimizations and structured data markup. Overall, the technical infrastructure is functional but outdated and requires modernization to improve security, performance, and user experience.
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 aronaspagasts.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 aronaspagasts.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.