Skip to main content

Security report for ipro.lv

iPro · Technology · Latvia

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, Email security and 1 other check.

Security score

69/100

Risk levelMedium

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

iPro is a Latvia-based IT solutions provider specializing in enterprise-grade security and IT infrastructure services. The company offers a range of services including cybersecurity, data center infrastructure, networking, and cloud solutions, targeting businesses that require scalable and secure IT environments. Their market position is that of a reliable and established technology partner within the Latvian and regional markets. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand image with clear navigation and relevant content tailored for business clients. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern SEO and privacy compliance tools such as Yoast SEO and Cookiebot, indicating a mature digital presence. Security-wise, the site enforces HTTPS, uses cookie consent mechanisms, and does not expose sensitive data, though explicit security policies and incident response contacts are not published. Overall, the website is trustworthy, well-maintained, and compliant with GDPR, making it a credible digital asset for the company.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 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

5 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 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. 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.

  3. 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 Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1
    • 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 ipro.lv

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
37
Security headers
50
Email security
70
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
Average
69

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

iPro operates in the technology sector with a focus on B2B IT services. Their business model revolves around providing comprehensive IT infrastructure and security solutions to enterprises and growing companies. The company leverages partnerships with major technology providers and integrates modern cloud and networking technologies. Their target customers are businesses requiring robust IT security and infrastructure management. The presence of social media links and structured data indicates an active engagement strategy. While direct contact details like phone numbers or emails are not prominently displayed, the contact form facilitates client communication. The company appears to be medium-sized with a stable market presence in Latvia, though no parent or subsidiary information is evident.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a good security posture with HTTPS enforced and the use of a reputable cookie consent management system (Cookiebot) that supports GDPR compliance. Security headers are likely implemented, and no vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. However, the absence of a published security policy or incident response information limits transparency in security governance. There is no evidence of vulnerability disclosure or security certifications. The site uses Google Tag Manager and analytics scripts responsibly with consent mechanisms in place. Overall, the security maturity is solid but could be improved by publishing explicit security and incident response policies.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security frameworks and practices.
  2. Add incident response contact information such as security@ or abuse@ email addresses.
  3. Implement and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file.
  4. Enhance contact information by including verified company phone numbers and emails.
  5. Consider obtaining and displaying relevant security certifications to boost trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
iPro
Description
Enterprise-grade security and IT solutions that protect, scale, and simplify your infrastructure—so your team can focus on what matters most.
Key services
Cybersecurity, Data Center Infrastructure, Networking, Cloud Solutions
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Yoast SEO, Google Tag Manager, Cookiebot
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent with granular controls
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via GTM)
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Marketing tools
Cookiebot
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and well-structured.
  2. Strong compliance with GDPR via Cookiebot consent mechanism.
  3. No explicit security or incident response policies published.
  4. Contact information is limited to a contact form; no direct emails or phone numbers found.
  5. Use of modern web technologies and SEO best practices.
  6. No suspicious or malicious indicators detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with Yoast SEO plugin for search optimization and Cookiebot for cookie consent management, indicating adherence to privacy regulations. Google Tag Manager is used for analytics and tracking, integrated with consent controls. The site loads CSS and JS resources efficiently and is mobile optimized with good accessibility features. Performance is moderate, with no major technical debt visible in the HTML. The use of structured data (JSON-LD) enhances SEO and provides clear business information to search engines. Hosting provider details are not explicit, but the site uses HTTPS with good SSL configuration. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern and well-maintained, supporting business operations effectively.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 69/100 +8Medium25 findingsView report
  2. 61/100Medium32 findingsView report
  3. 61/100Medium32 findingsView report
  4. 42/100High22 findingsView report
  5. 61/100Medium32 findingsView report
  6. 61/100Medium32 findingsView report
  7. 61/100Medium32 findingsView report
  8. 61/100Medium33 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with ipro.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 ipro.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.