Skip to main content

Security report for audits55.lv

SIA Audits 55 · Finance · Latvia

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

64/100

Risk levelMedium

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

SIA Audits 55 is a Latvian licensed sworn auditor company specializing in financial statement audits and related consulting services. Their offerings include audits for various legal entities, due diligence, EU funding project audits, and legal and tax consultations. The firm serves a diverse client base including foreign clients, providing multilingual services in Latvian, Russian, German, and English. The website content is professional and business-focused, reflecting a small but established auditing firm with a clear market position in Latvia. Technically, the website is built with basic HTML, CSS, and JavaScript without modern frameworks or CMS detected. The site shows moderate performance and basic mobile optimization but lacks advanced SEO and accessibility features. No analytics or tracking scripts were found, indicating minimal user tracking. From a security perspective, the site lacks visible security headers and privacy or cookie policies, which impacts compliance and security posture. The absence of contact information and incident response details further limits trust signals. The WHOIS data could not be retrieved due to query limits, restricting domain legitimacy analysis. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be improved with standard best practices. The overall risk is moderate with no critical vulnerabilities detected in the content. Strategic improvements in security headers, privacy compliance, and contact transparency are recommended to enhance trust and compliance.

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

7 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 audits55.lv

This scan found 23 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
77
Security headers
30
Email security
65
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
64

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 company operates in the finance sector as a licensed auditing firm with a focus on financial audits and consulting services. Their multilingual service offering and 50% foreign client base indicate a competitive advantage in serving international clients. The business model is professional services with revenue likely derived from audits, consulting, and valuation services. The website content suggests a small-sized firm with consistent branding and clear license information, enhancing credibility. No partnerships or subsidiaries were identified from the content. The lack of privacy and cookie policies may affect client trust and regulatory compliance.

Security posture

The current security maturity level is basic. The website uses HTTPS (assumed but not confirmed from provided data) but lacks security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options. No forms or input fields were detected, reducing attack surface but also limiting user engagement. There is no evidence of GDPR compliance mechanisms or incident response contacts. The absence of privacy and cookie policies is a compliance gap. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found in the content. Overall, the security culture appears minimal and would benefit from formalized policies and technical controls.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce HTTPS with strong SSL/TLS configuration and verify certificate validity.
  2. Add essential security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with GDPR compliance statements.
  4. Provide clear contact information for security incidents and designate a Data Protection Officer if applicable.
  5. Enhance mobile responsiveness and accessibility to improve user experience and compliance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
SIA Audits 55
Description
SIA Audits 55 is a sworn auditor company (license Nr.141) specializing in financial statement audits for various entities including limited liability companies, joint-stock companies, associations, political parties, religious organizations, municipalities, and individual entrepreneurs. Additional services include Due Diligence, EU funding project audits, legal and tax consultations, asset valuation, and other agreed procedures. Services are offered in Latvian, Russian, German, and English.
Key services
Financial statement audits, Due Diligence, EU funding project audits, Legal consultations, Tax consultations, Asset valuation
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML, CSS, JavaScript
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
40/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible and contains full business content.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the analyzed page.
  3. No contact emails, phone numbers, or social media links explicitly found in the provided content.
  4. No forms detected on the page.
  5. No security headers or advanced security configurations visible in the HTML.
  6. Website uses basic HTML, CSS, and JavaScript with no modern frameworks detected.
  7. No analytics or tracking scripts detected.
  8. Content is in Latvian with multilingual navigation options.
  9. Business is a licensed auditing company with multilingual service offerings.
  10. No signs of adult or questionable content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is constructed using basic HTML, CSS, and JavaScript without modern frameworks or CMS platforms. The code includes conditional CSS for older Internet Explorer versions, indicating legacy support considerations. No analytics or third-party tracking scripts are present, suggesting minimal data collection. Performance is moderate with no explicit optimization techniques detected. The site lacks advanced SEO features beyond basic meta tags. Hosting provider and infrastructure details are not discernible from the content. Overall, the technical implementation is functional but dated, with opportunities for modernization and improved performance.
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 audits55.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 audits55.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.