Skip to main content

Security report for invaldalt.com

Invalda INVL · Finance · Lithuania

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

70/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Invalda INVL operates as a significant investment management group based in Lithuania, targeting investors and financial market participants primarily in the Baltic region. The website presents a professional and consistent brand image with a focus on investment and asset management services. The digital infrastructure is built on WordPress, leveraging common plugins such as Yoast SEO and Cookiebot for SEO and privacy compliance respectively. Integration of Google Tag Manager and Omnisend indicates a mature marketing and analytics setup. Security posture is generally good with HTTPS enforced and a comprehensive cookie consent mechanism, although explicit security headers and incident response policies are absent. The absence of WHOIS registration data raises concerns about domain legitimacy, which impacts the overall trustworthiness despite the professional website content. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security headers, publishing incident response and vulnerability disclosure information, and improving transparency with clear contact details and terms of service.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 100 · Low
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

4 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. 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 SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching invaldalt.com

This scan found 22 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
65
Security headers
15
Email security
85
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
70

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 is positioned as a key player in the Lithuanian finance sector, focusing on investment and asset management. Its business model revolves around managing investments and providing financial services to institutional and retail investors. The website's content and linked domains suggest partnerships with financial market infrastructure providers such as Nasdaq Baltic. The marketing and analytics tools indicate a data-driven approach to customer engagement. However, the lack of visible contact information and missing WHOIS data could hinder trust and customer confidence. Growth indicators and subsidiary information are not explicitly available, limiting deeper business intelligence insights.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security maturity level with HTTPS enabled and a robust cookie consent mechanism that complies with GDPR requirements. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options reduces protection against common web attacks. No evidence of exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries was found. The lack of published security policies, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure channels indicates gaps in security governance and incident readiness. These gaps could expose the organization to compliance risks and reduce stakeholder confidence in its security culture.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive HTTP security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  2. Publish clear security and incident response policies on the website to enhance transparency and readiness.
  3. Add a security.txt file to facilitate responsible vulnerability disclosure and improve security posture.
  4. Enhance accessibility features to meet compliance standards and improve user experience for all visitors.
  5. Provide explicit and verified contact information including emails and phone numbers to improve business credibility and trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Invalda INVL
Description
Invalda INVL
Key services
Investment management, Asset management, Financial services
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, WordPress, Yoast SEO, Cookiebot, Google Tag Manager, Omnisend
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent with granular controls
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Omnisend
Marketing tools
Omnisend
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website content is fully accessible and professional
  2. Comprehensive cookie consent mechanism implemented with detailed cookie categories
  3. Privacy policy is present and linked as a PDF document
  4. No explicit contact emails or phone numbers found in the provided HTML snippet
  5. No terms of service or security policy pages detected
  6. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information found
  7. Website uses WordPress CMS with common plugins like Yoast SEO and Cookiebot
  8. Google Tag Manager and Omnisend marketing tools are integrated
  9. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected
  10. WHOIS data is missing, indicating potential domain registration or data privacy issues
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with a modern tech stack including jQuery, Yoast SEO for search engine optimization, and Cookiebot for cookie consent management. Google Tag Manager and Omnisend are used for analytics and marketing automation, indicating a mature digital marketing infrastructure. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and good navigation clarity. Performance is moderate, with no critical errors or broken elements detected. However, the hosting provider and server configuration details are not evident from the HTML content. There is an opportunity to improve technical SEO and accessibility compliance further.
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 invaldalt.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 invaldalt.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.