Skip to main content

Security report for florinus.lv

Other · N/a

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

The website www.florinus.lv is currently inaccessible beyond an anti-DOS rate limiting page that requires JavaScript and cookies to proceed. Due to this security challenge, no meaningful content, metadata, or business information is available for analysis. The WHOIS lookup failed due to query limits, preventing extraction of domain registration details. This severely limits the ability to assess the website's legitimacy, business profile, or security posture. The technical infrastructure appears minimal with only basic JavaScript usage detected. No security headers or HTTPS information is available, indicating potential security weaknesses. Overall, the site is effectively blocked for automated analysis, resulting in a low trust and security score.

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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

    • 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 florinus.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
75
Security headers
40
Email security
70
DNS health
75
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

No business intelligence data could be extracted due to the lack of accessible content and metadata. The website title 'Florinus.lv' is the only identifiable element. No contact details, company information, or service descriptions are present. The absence of privacy, cookie, or terms policies further limits business credibility assessment. Without WHOIS data, domain age and registrant legitimacy cannot be verified. The site likely targets human visitors only, but no audience or market positioning can be determined.

Security posture

The security posture is currently unknown but appears weak due to the absence of HTTPS confirmation and security headers in the provided data. The presence of an anti-DOS mechanism suggests some level of protection against automated attacks, but no detailed security policies or incident response contacts are found. The lack of vulnerability disclosure or security certifications further indicates immature security practices. The site is vulnerable to trust issues due to missing transparency and compliance documentation.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and confirm HTTPS with valid SSL/TLS certificates to secure communications.
  2. Publish clear privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  3. Provide visible contact information including emails and phone numbers for business credibility.
  4. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options to enhance security posture.
  5. Ensure WHOIS data is accessible or use privacy protection justified by business type to improve transparency.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. The website displays an anti-DOS rate limiting message with a loading delay and cookie setting, indicating a WAF or security challenge blocking automated or repeated requests. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript
Performance
slow
Mobile
poor
Accessibility
poor
SEO
poor

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 minimal and blocked by anti-DOS rate limiting.
  2. No visible metadata, structured data, or business information.
  3. No contact information, privacy, cookie, or terms policies found.
  4. No forms or external links detected in the provided HTML.
  5. No security headers or SSL information available from the data.
  6. WHOIS data unavailable due to query limit error.
  7. Website likely uses JavaScript and cookies to allow human visitors only.
  8. Overall analysis is incomplete due to WAF/security blocking.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses minimal JavaScript to enforce a loading delay and cookie setting as an anti-DOS measure. No CMS, frameworks, or external libraries are detected in the provided HTML snippet. The site lacks metadata, structured data, or SEO optimization. Performance is likely slow due to forced reloads and blocking mechanisms. Mobile optimization and accessibility are poor given the minimal content and reliance on JavaScript. Hosting provider and infrastructure details are not available. Overall, the technical implementation is basic and requires modernization.
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 florinus.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 florinus.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.