Skip to main content

Security report for balticexpert.lv

Other · N/a

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

Security score

57/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The domain balticexpert.lv currently presents no accessible website content, with an empty HTML body and no metadata or structured data available. The WHOIS lookup failed due to query limits, preventing extraction of registrar, creation, expiry, or registrant information. This lack of data and content suggests the website is either inactive, under maintenance, or blocked by security mechanisms. The absence of HTTPS and security headers further weakens the security posture. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies are present, and no contact or business information is available, limiting trust and credibility. Overall, the site is not currently suitable for business or user engagement.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
15/ 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 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 balticexpert.lv

This scan found 21 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
72
Security headers
50
Email security
85
DNS health
80
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
15
Average
57

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

Due to the absence of website content and WHOIS data, no meaningful business intelligence can be derived. There is no indication of company name, services, market position, or sector. The domain appears unused or dormant, with no visible digital footprint or partner relationships. Without content or metadata, the business model, target audience, and growth indicators remain unknown.

Security posture

The security posture is weak, with no HTTPS detected and no security headers present. The lack of privacy and cookie policies indicates non-compliance with GDPR and other data protection regulations. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is available. The domain's registration details are unavailable, limiting trust verification. The site is likely blocked or rate-limited, which may be a protective measure but also hinders transparency. Immediate improvements include enabling HTTPS, publishing privacy policies, and implementing security best practices.

Recommendations

  1. Enable HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate to secure all website traffic.
  2. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and build user trust.
  3. Implement security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Provide clear contact information and incident response channels for transparency and user support.
  5. Ensure WHOIS data is accessible and accurate to improve domain legitimacy and trustworthiness.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. Minimal HTML content with empty body and WHOIS query limit error indicates possible blocking or rate limiting by WHOIS provider and no accessible website content. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Performance
slow
Mobile
poor
Accessibility
poor
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
30/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website content is completely empty with no metadata or visible content.
  2. WHOIS lookup failed due to query limit, no registrar or domain info available.
  3. No security or privacy policies found on the site.
  4. No contact information or business details present.
  5. No external links, forms, scripts, or technologies detected.
  6. Site appears inaccessible or blocked, possibly under maintenance or misconfigured.
  7. No evidence of adult or unsafe content.
  8. Security posture is weak due to lack of HTTPS and security headers.
  9. Overall website quality and professionalism are very poor.
Technical notes

Notes

The website currently serves an empty HTML page with no metadata, scripts, or visible content. No CMS, frameworks, or technologies are detectable. The lack of HTTPS and security headers indicates minimal technical infrastructure. Performance and SEO cannot be assessed due to absence of content. The domain may be hosted on a provider that enforces WHOIS query limits, impacting data availability. Technical modernization and content deployment are necessary to establish a functional and secure web presence.
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 balticexpert.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 balticexpert.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.