Skip to main content

Security report for laclinika.com

LaClinika · Media · N/a

High risk. 10 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

31/100

Risk levelHigh

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

LaClinika is a small creative agency specializing in integrated marketing campaigns, brand strategy, and visual storytelling. Their website showcases various projects for notable brands, emphasizing creative direction and production services. The site is designed with modern web technologies including GSAP for animations and lazy loading for videos, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. However, the homepage indicates the project is suspended, which may impact business continuity. From a security perspective, the website lacks HTTPS enforcement and security headers, which are critical for protecting user data and ensuring trust. There are no privacy or cookie policies present, which raises compliance concerns especially under GDPR. The contact form collects user data but lacks visible anti-bot protections or explicit privacy notices. Overall, the website presents a professional design and good user experience but falls short in security and privacy compliance. The absence of HTTPS and policies significantly lowers the security posture and trustworthiness. Strategic improvements in security infrastructure and compliance documentation are recommended to enhance the site's credibility and protect user data.

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

10 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

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

  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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  3. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

  4. 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"

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

Keep watching laclinika.com

This scan found 25 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
0
Security headers
30
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
10
Average
31

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 · found on this site
  • 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

LaClinika operates as a niche creative agency focused on delivering visually rich and strategically effective brand communications. Their portfolio includes campaigns for brands like ésika, L'Oréal, and Falabella, indicating a client base in retail and beauty sectors. The business model centers on providing end-to-end creative services from brand strategy to production. The website targets marketing decision-makers and brand managers seeking innovative visual narratives. There is no evidence of a parent company or subsidiaries, suggesting an independent operation. The suspended project notice may indicate operational challenges or a temporary pause in business activities. No direct revenue streams or e-commerce functionalities are present on the site.

Security posture

The current security posture of the website is weak. The lack of HTTPS means data transmitted via the contact form is vulnerable to interception. No security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options are implemented, increasing risk of common web attacks. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates non-compliance with data protection regulations like GDPR. There is no evidence of incident response contacts or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms. While form inputs use required attributes, no advanced protections like CAPTCHA are present. Overall, the site exposes the business to reputational and legal risks and should prioritize implementing basic web security best practices.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate to secure all data transmissions.
  2. Add standard security headers including 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. Introduce CAPTCHA or other anti-bot measures on contact forms to prevent spam and abuse.
  5. Establish an incident response contact channel and consider a vulnerability disclosure policy.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
LaClinika
Description
LaClinika is a creative agency specializing in integrated campaigns, brand strategy, creative direction, digital content, and production services. They focus on visual narratives to help brands communicate effectively.
Key services
Brand strategy, Creative direction, Product conceptualization, Digital deployment, Content creation, Production
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, GSAP, ScrollTrigger, LazyLoad
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
30/100
Good practices seen
  • Form uses POST method
  • Input fields have required attributes

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website content is accessible and not blocked by WAF.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. Contact information limited to one email and contact form.
  4. No phone numbers or physical addresses provided.
  5. No social media URLs with actual links; placeholders present.
  6. Website uses modern JavaScript libraries for animation and lazy loading.
  7. No HTTPS or security headers information available; likely HTTP only.
  8. Project is marked as suspended on homepage.
  9. No structured data (JSON-LD) or Open Graph metadata found.
  10. No analytics or tracking scripts detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern front-end stack with HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript libraries such as GSAP and ScrollTrigger for animations, and LazyLoad for efficient media loading. The design is responsive and visually appealing with good navigation clarity. However, there is no CMS detected, and hosting details are unknown. Performance is moderate, with multiple large video files used as background and project showcases, which may impact load times on slower connections. Accessibility features are basic, with some ARIA labels present but no advanced accessibility enhancements. SEO optimization is minimal, with only basic meta description and viewport tags. The site lacks structured data and Open Graph metadata, limiting social media sharing effectiveness.
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 laclinika.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 laclinika.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.