Skip to main content

Security report for gatewaybaltic.com

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 3 other checks.

Security score

51/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website gatewaybaltic.com currently serves as a simple directory listing with minimal content, primarily offering downloadable files without any business descriptions, contact information, or interactive elements. The domain is long-established since 2004, indicating legitimacy in registration, but the website itself lacks professional content and user engagement features. The technical infrastructure appears basic, hosted on Ballou servers, with no detected CMS or modern web technologies. Security posture is weak, with no HTTPS enforcement or security headers, and directory listing enabled, which exposes file information and could pose security risks. Privacy and compliance policies are absent, and no contact or incident response information is provided, limiting trust and compliance with regulations. Overall, the site appears either abandoned, under development, or used for internal purposes rather than public business operations.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 100 · Medium
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

9 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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';…

  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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

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

Keep watching gatewaybaltic.com

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
72
Security headers
15
Email security
65
DNS health
85
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
50
Average
51

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

Due to the lack of business content, no clear market positioning, business model, or target audience can be identified. The domain's longevity suggests a stable registration but no active business presence is evident on the site. No partnerships, certifications, or trust indicators are present. The absence of contact details and policies further reduces business credibility and customer trust. The site may serve internal or archival functions rather than commercial or public-facing activities.

Security posture

The security maturity level is low. The absence of HTTPS and security headers exposes the site to potential interception and attacks. Directory listing enabled increases risk of information leakage. No vulnerability disclosures, incident response contacts, or security policies are found. Compliance with GDPR or other regulations is not demonstrated. The site lacks basic security hygiene and should prioritize implementing HTTPS, disabling directory listing, and adding security headers. Incident response readiness and data protection practices are not evident.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate to secure data in transit.
  2. Disable directory listing on the web server to prevent exposure of file structures.
  3. Add comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and other regulations.
  4. Publish clear contact information including security incident response contacts.
  5. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to improve security posture.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
No business description available; the site content is a directory listing with downloadable files.
Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Performance
moderate
Mobile
poor
Accessibility
poor
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
30/100

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 serves as a simple directory listing with downloadable files.
  2. No business or contact information is provided on the site.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  4. No security headers or HTTPS enforcement detected from provided data.
  5. WHOIS data shows a long-registered domain with no privacy protection.
  6. No analytics, advertising, or tracking technologies detected.
  7. No forms or interactive elements present.
  8. No social media or external links found in the HTML content.
  9. Site appears to be either under development, abandoned, or used for internal file sharing.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is a basic directory listing with no detected CMS or modern web frameworks. Hosting is provided by Ballou based on nameservers. No scripts, analytics, or tracking technologies are present. The site lacks mobile optimization and accessibility features. Performance is likely moderate due to minimal content but lacks SEO optimization and meta tags. The technical implementation is minimal and outdated, with opportunities for modernization and security improvements.
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 gatewaybaltic.com. 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 gatewaybaltic.com.

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.