Skip to main content

Security report for greencosmetic.eu

Retail · Latvia

Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

59/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website greencosmetic.eu represents a small retail business focused on the manufacture and sale of natural cosmetics, based in Riga, Latvia. The site is minimalistic, serving primarily as a contact and brand presence page with partner links to related cosmetics companies. The business model appears to be direct retail and wholesale of natural cosmetic products, targeting a general audience interested in green and organic cosmetics. The website lacks detailed business information, policies, or e-commerce functionality, indicating a basic digital presence. From a technical perspective, the website uses standard HTML with external analytics scripts from Google Tag Manager and Yandex Metrika. There is no evidence of a CMS or advanced frameworks. The site is moderately optimized for mobile but lacks SEO and accessibility enhancements. Security posture is weak due to missing security headers and no visible HTTPS enforcement details. The WHOIS data is unavailable due to EURid privacy restrictions, which is common for .eu domains but reduces transparency. Security evaluation highlights the absence of privacy and cookie policies, no security.txt or incident response contacts, and no visible security best practices implemented. The site does not expose sensitive data or forms, reducing attack surface but also limiting user engagement. Overall, the security risk is moderate but could be improved by implementing HTTPS, security headers, and compliance documentation. The overall risk assessment suggests a low complexity, low risk small business website with room for improvement in security, privacy compliance, and content richness. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security configurations, publishing privacy and cookie policies, and improving SEO and accessibility to build trust and compliance.

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

9 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

  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"

    • 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 greencosmetic.eu

This scan found 23 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
70
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
10
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

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 greencosmetic.eu, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for greencosmetic.eu 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

Greencosmetic.eu operates in the retail sector specializing in natural cosmetics, serving primarily the Latvian market. The business leverages partnerships with ecolatier.com and organicmimi.eu, indicating a collaborative ecosystem in the organic cosmetics niche. The business model is straightforward retail and manufacturing, with contact details prominently displayed for direct communication. The lack of e-commerce or detailed product listings suggests a focus on wholesale or offline sales channels. Growth indicators are limited due to minimal online presence. The partnership ecosystem is modest but relevant to the cosmetics industry. Overall, the company appears to be a small, niche player with a basic digital footprint and potential for expansion through enhanced online engagement and compliance.

Security posture

The security posture of greencosmetic.eu is basic with significant gaps. The site lacks HTTPS enforcement details in the provided data, no security headers are detected, and no privacy or cookie policies are published. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are present. The use of Google Tag Manager and Yandex Metrika introduces moderate user tracking but without visible privacy compliance measures. The absence of forms reduces attack vectors but also limits user interaction. The WHOIS data is privacy protected, which is typical but reduces transparency. Overall, the site is low risk but would benefit from implementing standard security best practices, including HTTPS, security headers, privacy documentation, and incident response contacts to improve trust and compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate and enforce secure connections site-wide.
  2. Add standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and inform users.
  4. Establish a security.txt file or vulnerability disclosure policy to facilitate responsible reporting.
  5. Enhance SEO, accessibility, and mobile optimization to improve user experience and trust.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Manufacture and sale of natural cosmetics (implied from commented text)
Key services
Manufacture of natural cosmetics, Sale of natural cosmetics
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
Google Tag Manager, Yandex Metrika
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
40/100

Analytics and tracking

Services
Yandex Metrika, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Yandex Metrika
Marketing tools
Yandex Metrika
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a simple landing page with minimal content
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found
  3. Contact info is provided with Latvian phone and email
  4. No forms or user input fields present
  5. Uses Google Tag Manager and Yandex Metrika for analytics
  6. No CMS or hosting provider info detected
  7. No security headers or HTTPS status info available
  8. WHOIS data is not disclosed by EURid, typical for .eu domains
  9. Partner logos link to related cosmetics sites
  10. No social media links detected
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with basic HTML and CSS, with no detected CMS or advanced frameworks. It uses Google Tag Manager and Yandex Metrika for analytics and tracking. The site is moderately optimized for mobile devices but lacks SEO meta tags and accessibility features. No hosting provider or infrastructure details are available. Performance is likely moderate given the minimal content and external script usage. The technical debt is low but modernization opportunities include adopting HTTPS, improving SEO, and adding accessibility features. The lack of security headers and privacy policies represents a technical risk that should be addressed to improve compliance and security posture.
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 greencosmetic.eu. 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 greencosmetic.eu.

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.