Skip to main content

Security report for balticadvocate.com

Advokāts Indulis Brodiņš · Other · Latvia

Low risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

80/100

Risk levelLow

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

The website balticadvocate.com represents a professional legal service provider, Advokāts Indulis Brodiņš, a sworn advocate in Riga, Latvia. The site offers detailed information about legal services in criminal, civil, administrative, and family law, targeting individuals and entities seeking legal representation. The business operates as a small, local legal practice with clear contact information and professional presentation. Technically, the website is hosted on Google Sites, leveraging Google Fonts, Google Analytics, and Google Maps embeds, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. The site is mobile-optimized and provides a good user experience with clear navigation and relevant content. Security-wise, HTTPS is enabled ensuring encrypted communication; however, the absence of security headers and lack of privacy and terms of service pages indicate room for improvement in compliance and security posture. The WHOIS data is unavailable, which raises some concerns about domain registration transparency but does not directly impact the legitimacy of the business based on website content. Overall, the site is functional and professional but would benefit from enhanced security practices and compliance documentation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 100 · Medium
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

4 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

  2. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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 Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, Google APIs

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

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

Keep watching balticadvocate.com

This scan found 13 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
95
Security headers
70
Email security
85
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
80

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

Balticadvocate.com operates in the legal services sector, focusing on criminal defense and civil litigation within Latvia. The business model is service-oriented, providing direct legal representation and consultation. The website positions the advocate as a member of the Latvian Bar Association, enhancing credibility. Revenue streams likely derive from client legal fees. The target market includes individuals involved in criminal or civil legal matters and administrative processes. The site does not indicate partnerships or subsidiaries, suggesting an independent practice. The use of Google Sites suggests a cost-effective digital presence. Growth indicators are not explicit, but the professional presentation and clear contact details support client acquisition. The absence of social media or extended digital marketing channels may limit broader market reach.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic security posture with HTTPS enabled, ensuring secure data transmission. However, the lack of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options reduces protection against common web attacks like clickjacking and MIME sniffing. No forms are present, minimizing attack surface for input-based vulnerabilities. The use of Google-managed hosting and services provides inherent infrastructure security. Privacy compliance is partial; a cookie consent banner is present, but no privacy policy or terms of service pages are found, which may expose the business to regulatory risks under GDPR. Incident response and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are absent, limiting preparedness for security incidents. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a basic informational site but requires enhancements for compliance and defense in depth.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and terms of service pages to improve legal compliance and user trust.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against web vulnerabilities.
  3. Publish incident response contact information and consider a vulnerability disclosure policy to improve security transparency.
  4. Regularly review and update cookie consent mechanisms to ensure GDPR compliance.
  5. Consider WHOIS privacy or registration transparency improvements to enhance domain trustworthiness.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Advokāts Indulis Brodiņš
Description
Legal services including criminal defense, civil process representation, administrative process representation, legal consultations in criminal, civil, family, and administrative law.
Key services
Criminal defense, Civil litigation representation, Administrative process representation, Legal consultations
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Sites, Google Fonts, Google Analytics, Google Maps Embed
Platforms
Google Sites
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled

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 a Google Sites hosted legal service site for a Latvian sworn advocate.
  2. WHOIS data is missing, which is unusual and reduces domain trust.
  3. No privacy policy or terms of service pages found.
  4. Cookie consent banner is present and functional.
  5. Contact information including phone, email, and physical address is clearly provided.
  6. No security headers detected; HTTPS is enabled.
  7. No forms detected on the main page; no data collection forms present.
  8. No social media links found.
  9. Website content is professional, relevant, and safe.
  10. Google Analytics is used for tracking with default consent denied initially.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Google Sites, utilizing Google Fonts and Google Analytics for styling and analytics respectively. The infrastructure is hosted by Google, ensuring reliable uptime and performance. The site loads moderately fast, with no heavy scripts or complex frameworks detected. SEO is basic with proper meta tags and Open Graph data present, but no advanced SEO techniques are observed. Accessibility features are minimal but functional. The site lacks custom CMS or backend technologies, reducing complexity but limiting customization. There is no evidence of outdated or vulnerable libraries. The technical setup is suitable for a small professional service but could be enhanced with additional security and compliance features.
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 balticadvocate.com. 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 balticadvocate.com.

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.