Skip to main content

Security report for jk.lv

SIA "Juridiskā koledža" · Education · Latvia

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

Security score

43/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Juridiskā koledža is a Latvian educational institution specializing in legal and related professional studies. The website presents a comprehensive offering of study programs, courses, and international cooperation such as ERASMUS. The institution positions itself as a provider of qualified specialists with practical and theoretical knowledge for the labor market in Latvia and abroad. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with common libraries like jQuery and Bootstrap, but suffers from slow performance and lacks a valid SSL certificate, which impacts security and user trust. Security posture is weak due to missing HTTPS, lack of security headers, and absence of DMARC records, although SPF is correctly configured. Privacy compliance is minimal with no visible privacy or cookie policies or consent mechanisms. Contact information and certifications are clearly presented, supporting business credibility. Overall, the site is functional but requires significant improvements in security and privacy to meet modern standards.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 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 jk.lv

This scan found 20 issues across 5 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
100
Security headers
15
Email security
50
DNS health
75
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
0
Average
43

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 institution operates in the education sector targeting students interested in law, human resources, real estate, finance, and cybersecurity. It maintains a medium-sized presence with multiple campuses and international partnerships. Revenue streams likely include tuition fees, courses, and professional development programs. The website reflects a stable brand with certifications such as ISO 9001 and Investor in Excellence, indicating quality management. The partnership ecosystem includes international ERASMUS programs but no explicit business partner domains were identified. Growth indicators include active news updates and event galleries. The business model focuses on providing accessible education with both on-site and e-learning options.

Security posture

The current security maturity is low. The absence of a valid SSL certificate means data transmitted is not encrypted, exposing users to interception risks. Missing security headers and lack of DMARC records increase susceptibility to attacks such as clickjacking, MIME sniffing, and email spoofing. The SPF record is a positive control for email sending. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is available, indicating limited preparedness for security incidents. The site does not implement cookie consent or privacy policies, which is a compliance gap under GDPR. Overall, the security posture exposes the institution to reputational and operational risks.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Implement HTTP security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Add DMARC DNS records to complement the existing SPF and improve email security.
  4. Develop and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with user consent mechanisms.
  5. Establish an incident response plan and publish contact information for security issues.
  6. Optimize website performance by reducing resource count and improving load times.
  7. Enhance accessibility features and SEO metadata for better user experience and discoverability.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
SIA "Juridiskā koledža"
Registration number
LV40003506758
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 6.8.1 with a Bootstrap 4.5.2 frontend framework and jQuery for scripting. It uses Slick Carousel for sliders and a gallery lightbox plugin for image display. Hosting is provided by hosteris.lv with DNS configured properly including SPF but lacking DMARC and CAA. Performance is poor with a load time exceeding 20 seconds and a large number of resources (264). Mobile optimization is good, but accessibility and SEO are basic. The SSL certificate is invalid or missing, and no modern TLS protocols are supported. The site uses multiple external CDNs and tracking scripts including Google Analytics and Microsoft Clarity. There is no evidence of advanced security frameworks or compliance certifications beyond ISO 9001. The technical debt includes outdated SSL configuration, missing security headers, and lack of privacy compliance features.
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 jk.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 jk.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.