Baltic Beauty Awards is a regional initiative based in Latvia that recognizes innovation and sustainability in the Baltic beauty industry. The platform serves beauty brands and companies by providing an award system that highlights excellence in skincare, haircare, and body care products. The website is professionally designed with clear navigation and content relevant to its target audience of beauty industry stakeholders in the Baltic region. Technically, the site leverages modern frameworks such as Django, Bootstrap, and htmx, hosted behind Cloudflare, ensuring good performance and mobile optimization. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and CSRF protections, though it lacks some advanced security headers and explicit privacy and cookie policies, which are areas for improvement. Overall, the site is trustworthy, safe, and well-positioned in its niche, but could enhance compliance and security transparency.
a(a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
b(b) Incident handling: One indicator
c(c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
d(d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
e(e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
f(f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
g(g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
h(h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
i(i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
j(j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside
Partly checked
One indicator
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.
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
This scan found 24 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
90
Email security
40
DNS health
65
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
10
Average
50
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
Breach exposure
Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.
Dark web exposure
Add-on
Leaked records that mention balticbeautyawards.lv, from OffSeq Breach.
No leaked records found
Breach holds no records for balticbeautyawards.lv right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.
Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.
Business context
Business profile
The Baltic Beauty Awards operates as an important entity within the retail beauty sector, focusing on the Baltic market. Its business model revolves around awarding and promoting innovative beauty products, which helps position it as a thought leader and trendsetter in the region. The initiative is supported by partnerships with the Baltic Beauty exhibition and the E-BEAUTY.LV portal, enhancing its credibility and reach. The target customers are beauty brands seeking recognition and market differentiation. The platform's revenue streams likely include application fees and sponsorships. Growth indicators include ongoing award cycles and active engagement with industry participants. The partnership ecosystem is well-defined, with clear links to regional beauty industry stakeholders.
Security posture
The website demonstrates a moderate to good security maturity level. HTTPS is enforced, and CSRF tokens protect form submissions, indicating awareness of common web security practices. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options reduces defense-in-depth. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analysis. Compliance with GDPR is partial due to missing privacy and cookie policies and lack of consent mechanisms. Incident response readiness and security policy disclosures are not present, which could hinder rapid response to security events. Overall, the security posture is adequate for the business type but could be strengthened by adopting additional best practices and transparency.
Recommendations
Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy to improve GDPR compliance and user trust.
Implement a cookie consent mechanism to comply with EU regulations and enhance transparency.
Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to harden the website against common attacks.
Provide clear security policy and incident response contact information to demonstrate preparedness and accountability.
Regularly review and update third-party scripts and dependencies to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
Site observations
Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.
Business
Company
BALTIC BEAUTY AWARDS
Description
An initiative to celebrate innovation and excellence in the Baltic beauty industry by awarding the most innovative and sustainable beauty products in skincare, haircare, and body care sectors.
Key services
Award application processing, Industry recognition, Information dissemination about beauty innovations
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent
Technology
Stack
Bootstrap 5.3.0, Google Fonts (Montserrat), htmx 1.9.10, Google Tag Manager (gtag.js)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good
Security
Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
HTTPS enforced (implied by canonical and og:url https URLs)
CSRF token implemented for forms
Use of Cloudflare DNS and likely CDN
Analytics and tracking
Services
Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager)
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor
Advertising
Transparency
basic
Site quality
Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
high
Key observations
Website is fully accessible with no WAF blocking.
No explicit privacy or cookie policies found, which is a compliance gap.
Contact information is clearly provided with phone and email.
No social media links detected.
Technical stack is modern and uses reputable libraries and frameworks.
Security best practices partially implemented but could be improved with additional headers and policies.
Content is professional, relevant, and safe for general audiences.
Technical notes
Notes
The website is built on a modern technology stack including Django as the backend framework, Bootstrap for responsive design, and htmx for enhanced interactivity. Google Fonts and Google Tag Manager are used for typography and analytics respectively. Hosting is managed via Cloudflare, providing DNS and CDN services that improve performance and security. The site loads moderately fast and is mobile optimized with good SEO practices including meta tags and hreflang attributes. Accessibility is basic but functional. There is room for improvement in implementing advanced security headers and privacy compliance features. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a professional and user-friendly experience with moderate technical debt.
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.
Reviews of this site
Share your experience with balticbeautyawards.lv. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.
Community rating
No published reviews yet. Be the first to review balticbeautyawards.lv.