Skip to main content

Security report for foral.lv

Foral Patent Law Offices · Other · Latvia

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

65/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Foral Patent Law Offices is a small, established intellectual property law firm based in Latvia, founded in 1991. The company specializes in trademarks, patents, industrial designs, and related legal services including enforcement and litigation. The website presents a professional image with clear service descriptions and a consistent brand presence. Technically, the site uses common JavaScript libraries such as jQuery and integrates Google Maps API for location services. Cookie consent mechanisms are implemented, indicating attention to privacy compliance. However, no WHOIS data was available due to query limits, limiting domain legitimacy verification. Security headers and advanced security policies are not evident, suggesting room for improvement in security posture. Overall, the website is functional, professional, and trustworthy for its business domain.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
43/ 100 · High
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

5 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 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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

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

  3. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

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

Keep watching foral.lv

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. See sample alerts.

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
67
Security headers
30
Email security
65
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
43
Average
65

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 foral.lv, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for foral.lv right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

Monitor on Breach (opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

The firm targets businesses and individuals requiring intellectual property legal services, positioning itself as a reliable and professional partner with over 30 years of experience. The business model is service-oriented, focusing on legal consultancy and representation in IP matters. The website lacks visible contact details and certifications, which could be improved to enhance credibility. The partnership with the website developer graftik.lv is evident. No analytics or marketing tools are detected, indicating a low digital marketing footprint. The absence of terms of service and security policies suggests potential compliance gaps. The firm operates in the legal services sector under the 'Other' industry classification.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS (assumed from standard practice though not explicitly verified here) and uses cookie consent banners with opt-in/out options, supporting privacy compliance. However, no security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options are detected, and no incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is available. The absence of contact information for security incidents and lack of visible certifications or security policies indicate a moderate security maturity level. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found in the HTML content. Recommendations include implementing security headers, publishing security policies, and enhancing incident response readiness.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and verify HTTP security headers (CSP, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to improve security posture.
  2. Ensure HTTPS is enforced site-wide with strong SSL/TLS configuration.
  3. Publish visible contact information for security incidents and a vulnerability disclosure policy.
  4. Add terms of service and security policy pages to improve compliance and transparency.
  5. Enhance contact information visibility including emails and phone numbers to improve business credibility.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Foral Patent Law Offices
Description
FORAL Patent Law Offices is known as a professional and reliable partner for the acquisition, enforcement and litigation of intellectual property rights. Established in 1991 the firm has grown ...
Key services
trademarks, patents, industrial designs, opposition, litigation, intellectual property enforcement
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Google Maps API, cookieconsent2
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
60/100
Good practices seen
  • Cookie consent banner with opt-in and opt-out options

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenge.
  2. WHOIS data unavailable due to query limit error; no registrar or domain age info extracted.
  3. Website provides clear privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms.
  4. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses explicitly found on homepage HTML.
  5. No terms of service or security policy pages detected.
  6. No visible security headers or advanced security configurations detected in HTML content.
  7. Website uses common JavaScript libraries and Google Maps API.
  8. External links limited to CDN, Google Maps, and website developer (graftik.lv).
  9. No analytics or tracking scripts detected beyond cookie consent.
  10. Content is professional and relevant to intellectual property legal services.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a simple technology stack with jQuery, Google Maps API, and cookieconsent2 for privacy compliance. No CMS or advanced frameworks are detected, suggesting a custom or lightweight site build. Performance is moderate with basic mobile optimization and good SEO meta tags. Accessibility features are basic but present. No analytics or tracking scripts beyond cookie consent are detected, indicating minimal user tracking. Hosting provider and SSL details are not available from the HTML content. The site structure is clear with consistent branding and navigation. Opportunities exist to modernize the tech stack and improve security configurations.
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 foral.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 foral.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.