Skip to main content

Security report for bunas.lv

Other · N/a

Partial score · DNS & email only

68/100

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

The website bunas.lv currently serves a security CAPTCHA challenge page powered by BitNinja, designed to block automated or suspicious traffic. The page content is minimal and focused solely on bot mitigation, with no visible business or commercial content. The site uses outdated CMS meta tags referencing Joomla 1.5 and WordPress 2.5, indicating legacy technology usage. Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager scripts are present for tracking purposes. Due to the security challenge, the actual website content is inaccessible, limiting comprehensive analysis. Technically, the site employs Google reCAPTCHA v2 for bot protection and integrates Google Analytics for user tracking. However, no HTTPS enforcement or security headers were detected in the provided data, and the CMS versions are outdated, which may pose security risks. The site lacks privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies, and no contact or business information is available on the challenge page. Security-wise, the presence of a BitNinja WAF challenge indicates an active defense against malicious traffic, but the lack of visible security headers and outdated CMS versions suggest potential vulnerabilities if the main site is accessible beyond the challenge. The absence of privacy compliance indicators and contact information further reduces trustworthiness. Overall, the site is currently inaccessible beyond the security gate, resulting in a low AI score and limited business credibility. Strategic recommendations include updating CMS platforms, implementing HTTPS with proper security headers, publishing privacy and cookie policies, and providing clear business contact information to improve trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
10/ 100 · Critical
Checks completed
6of 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

6 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

    • 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

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

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

Keep watching bunas.lv

This scan found 17 issues across 5 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
Email security
85
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
10
Average
68

Not counted

  • Security headers: did not complete in this scan.
  • 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 website being blocked by a BitNinja CAPTCHA challenge, no direct business information or market positioning can be ascertained. The site appears to be a small entity with legacy CMS usage and no visible commercial content. The lack of contact details, privacy policies, or business descriptions limits insights into revenue streams, target customers, or partnerships. The presence of BitNinja security suggests some level of concern for cyber threats. No related or partner domains were identified beyond BitNinja's domain for security services.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic security posture primarily through the use of BitNinja's WAF and Google reCAPTCHA v2 to mitigate automated threats. However, the absence of HTTPS enforcement details, lack of security headers, and outdated CMS versions indicate potential vulnerabilities. No incident response or security policy information is available. Privacy compliance is lacking, with no GDPR or cookie consent mechanisms detected. The security score is moderate due to the active WAF but reduced by missing best practices and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with HSTS and ensure all site content is served securely.
  2. Update CMS platforms to supported, secure versions to reduce vulnerabilities.
  3. Add comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with GDPR compliance mechanisms.
  4. Publish clear business contact information including support and security contacts.
  5. Enhance security headers (CSP, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) and monitor for vulnerabilities regularly.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

BitNinja detected. The website is presenting a security CAPTCHA challenge page by BitNinja to block automated or suspicious traffic. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
Joomla 1.5, WordPress 2.5, Drupal, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, reCAPTCHA v2
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
40/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA v2 for bot mitigation
  • Security check by BitNinja.IO

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website content is blocked by a BitNinja CAPTCHA security challenge.
  2. No WHOIS data available due to query limit error.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies detected.
  4. No contact information or business details found on the page.
  5. Website uses outdated CMS versions (Joomla 1.5, WordPress 2.5) indicated in meta tags.
  6. Uses Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager for tracking.
  7. No HTTPS or security headers information available from provided data.
  8. No evidence of business or commercial content; page is purely a security gate.
  9. No social media or external business contact links found.
  10. Content safety rating is safe with no adult or questionable content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses legacy CMS platforms (Joomla 1.5, WordPress 2.5) as indicated by meta tags, which are outdated and potentially insecure. It integrates Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager for tracking and uses Google reCAPTCHA v2 for bot mitigation. The site is protected by BitNinja's WAF, which presents a CAPTCHA challenge to visitors. No information about hosting provider or SSL configuration was found. The site shows basic mobile optimization and accessibility but lacks modern SEO and performance optimizations. The technical debt is high due to outdated CMS and missing security best practices.
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 bunas.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 bunas.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.