Skip to main content

Security report for gaja.lt

Gaja.lt · Retail · Lithuania

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Email security and 2 other checks.

Security score

59/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Gaja.lt is a Lithuanian online retail store offering a wide range of products including home furniture, accessories, and electronics. The website targets general consumers primarily in Lithuania, providing services such as free worldwide shipping, money-back guarantees, and 24/7 online support. The business model is typical for e-commerce, focusing on direct sales to consumers with a diverse product catalog. Technically, the site uses common web technologies like jQuery, Bootstrap, and Google Fonts, with a moderate performance and good mobile optimization. However, no CMS or hosting provider details are evident, and SEO and accessibility features are basic. Security posture is moderate; while forms use POST methods, there is a lack of security headers and no visible cookie consent mechanism, which impacts privacy compliance. WHOIS data is unavailable due to query limits, with privacy protection likely in place, which slightly reduces trust but is understandable for a small e-commerce business. Overall, the site is functional and professional but could improve in security and privacy transparency.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
28/ 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

8 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 gaja.lt

This scan found 25 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
75
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
28
Average
59

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

The company operates in the retail and e-commerce sectors, serving a broad consumer base with a variety of product categories. The business appears small in size with no visible parent or subsidiary companies. The website emphasizes customer trust through guarantees and support but lacks detailed business registration or physical contact information. The absence of phone numbers and physical addresses may limit customer confidence. The marketing approach is basic, with no evident advertising or analytics tools integrated. The company’s market position is generalist rather than niche-focused, which may affect competitive advantage. Growth indicators and partnerships are not discernible from the website content.

Security posture

The security maturity level is basic. The website uses HTTPS (assumed but not confirmed from data), and forms use POST methods, which is positive. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and HSTS reduces protection against common web attacks. No incident response or security policy information is provided, and no vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files are found. Privacy compliance is limited, with no cookie consent mechanism despite a privacy policy link. The lack of WHOIS transparency due to query limits and privacy protection is typical but reduces trust. Overall, the site is functional but would benefit from enhanced security controls and compliance measures.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to improve protection against web attacks.
  2. Add a visible cookie consent banner and ensure GDPR compliance with clear privacy and data handling disclosures.
  3. Publish detailed contact information including phone numbers and physical addresses to enhance business credibility and customer trust.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party libraries to mitigate vulnerabilities and improve technical robustness.
  5. Consider publishing a security policy and incident response contact information to demonstrate commitment to security and transparency.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Gaja.lt
Description
Online retail store offering a variety of products including home furniture, painting pens, jewelry & accessories, skin care tools, weddings & events items, and wet wax. The site promotes daily sales and features new arrivals and popular categories.
Key services
Product sales, Worldwide free shipping, Money-back guarantee, 24/7 online support, Convenient payment options
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Bootstrap, Owl Carousel, Isotope, Fancybox, Popper.js, TweenMax, Swiper, Google Fonts
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
50/100
Good practices seen
  • Secure forms with POST method

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 Lithuanian language e-commerce store with multiple product categories.
  2. No WHOIS data available due to query limit exceeded; domain registration details unknown.
  3. No explicit privacy or cookie consent banners detected despite presence of privacy policy link.
  4. No phone numbers or physical addresses found; only email contact provided.
  5. No security headers detected; HTTPS status unknown from provided data.
  6. No analytics or tracking scripts detected in the HTML content.
  7. Social media links present but URLs are placeholders (#).
  8. Forms use POST method but lack visible anti-CSRF tokens or CAPTCHA.
  9. Site uses multiple common JS libraries and Google Fonts.
  10. Footer includes copyright notice for 2025.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a standard front-end technology stack with jQuery, Bootstrap, and various UI libraries like Owl Carousel and Fancybox. Google Fonts are used for typography. The HTML structure is valid and includes responsive design elements for mobile optimization. However, no CMS or backend platform is identified. Performance is moderate with no explicit optimization indicators. SEO is basic with minimal meta tags and no structured data such as JSON-LD or Open Graph tags. Accessibility features are limited, and no ARIA roles or landmarks are evident. The site lacks analytics or tracking scripts, indicating minimal user tracking. Overall, the technical implementation is functional but could be enhanced with modern SEO, accessibility, and performance 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 gaja.lt. 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 gaja.lt.

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.