Skip to main content

Security report for fotosesija.lv

Other · Latvia

Medium risk. 10 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Email security and 2 other checks.

Security score

54/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Fotosesija.lv is a Latvian photography service website offering professional photoshoots including portraits, couples, family, and individual sessions primarily in Riga and across Latvia. The site is built on WordPress with a modern tech stack including Bootstrap and jQuery, providing a good user experience with mobile optimization and clear navigation. The content is well-structured, relevant, and presented in Latvian, targeting a general audience interested in photography services. Security posture is solid with HTTPS enabled and no visible vulnerabilities, though security headers and cookie consent mechanisms are missing. WHOIS data could not be retrieved due to query limits, limiting domain trust analysis. Overall, the site is professional and safe but could improve privacy compliance and security transparency.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
10/ 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

10 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

  2. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

  3. 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"

    • 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 fotosesija.lv

This scan found 28 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
62
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
10
Average
54

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 fotosesija.lv, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for fotosesija.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 website operates as a small local service provider in the photography niche within Latvia. It leverages content marketing via blog articles to engage its audience and build trust. The business model is service-based, focusing on personalized photography sessions. There is no visible contact information such as emails or phone numbers on the homepage, which may impact lead generation. The site uses standard WordPress plugins and themes, indicating moderate digital maturity. No partnerships or subsidiaries are evident. The site maintains consistent branding and quality content, positioning itself as a trustworthy local photography service.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS with valid SSL certificates, ensuring encrypted communication. However, it lacks advanced security headers like Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options, which could enhance protection against common web attacks. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are present, which could be a gap in security governance. The absence of cookie consent mechanisms may also pose compliance risks under GDPR. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be improved with additional security best practices and compliance measures.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner and detailed cookie policy to improve GDPR compliance.
  3. Publish terms of service and incident response policies to increase transparency and trust.
  4. Include clear contact information such as company email and phone number to improve business credibility and user engagement.
  5. Consider adding a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to demonstrate security maturity.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Iemūžini īpašos mirkļus ar profesionālu fotosesiju! Piedāvājam portretu, pāru, ģimenes un individuālas fotosesijas Rīgā un visā Latvijā. Dabiski, estētiski un ar personīgu pieeju.
Key services
portretu fotosesijas, pāru fotosesijas, ģimenes fotosesijas, individuālas fotosesijas
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, PHP, jQuery, Bootstrap, Font Awesome, Swipebox, Google Fonts
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security plugins (implied by WordPress)

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a WordPress-based photography blog and service site targeting Latvian customers.
  2. Content is in Latvian language with some English metadata.
  3. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on the homepage or sidebar.
  4. Privacy policy page exists but no cookie consent mechanism detected.
  5. No terms of service or security/incident response policies found.
  6. No WHOIS data available due to query limit error.
  7. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
  8. No advertising or tracking scripts detected beyond standard WordPress plugins.
  9. Site uses HTTPS with valid SSL certificates.
  10. Site uses modern frontend libraries and is mobile optimized.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 6.8.2 using the Urbamag theme and several plugins including Contact Form 7. It uses Bootstrap 3.3.7 for responsive design and Font Awesome 4.7.0 for icons. The site loads jQuery 3.7.1 and related libraries for UI interactions. Google Fonts are used for typography. The site is served over HTTPS with valid SSL certificates. Performance is moderate with no obvious blocking scripts or heavy resources. Accessibility is basic with some ARIA attributes and skip links present. SEO is enhanced by All in One SEO plugin with proper meta tags and structured data in JSON-LD format. There is no evidence of advanced caching or CDN usage. Overall, the technical infrastructure is standard for a small WordPress site with room for 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 fotosesija.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 fotosesija.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.