Skip to main content

Security report for laskana.lv

Laskana · Transportation · Latvia

High risk. 10 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Network security and 2 other checks.

Security score

48/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Laskana is a well-established Latvian company specializing in forestry management, wood material purchasing, transport, and logistics services with over 30 years of experience. The company operates primarily in Latvia, serving businesses and individuals involved in forestry and related sectors. Their website reflects a professional digital presence built on WordPress, incorporating SEO best practices and modern performance optimizations such as lazy loading and Google Tag Manager integration. Contact mechanisms include a detailed contact form with file upload capabilities, phone, and email contacts, as well as social media channels on Facebook and Instagram. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS and reCAPTCHA usage, but lacks visible security headers and explicit cookie consent mechanisms, which are recommended for GDPR compliance. WHOIS data could not be retrieved due to query limits, limiting domain registration trust verification. Overall, the website is professional, content-rich, and trustworthy for its business domain.

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

      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

    • High

      No Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

  2. Network security

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

    • High

      High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

      Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

      What to do: Consider restricting access to FTP or implementing strong authentication

      • 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

  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

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

Keep watching laskana.lv

This scan found 26 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
72
Security headers
15
Email security
85
DNS health
85
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
10
Average
48

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

Laskana holds a strong market position in Latvia's forestry and logistics sectors, leveraging over three decades of experience. Their business model focuses on providing full-cycle forest management, purchasing of wood materials, and transport/logistics services including stevedoring and repair workshops. The company targets forestry owners, logistics clients, and industrial customers. Their digital presence supports lead generation and customer engagement through detailed service descriptions and a comprehensive contact form. The company maintains active social media profiles and uses Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing. The website's content and structure suggest a mature business with a focus on quality service delivery and customer trust.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and Google reCAPTCHA on forms, indicating a baseline security posture. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options reduces defense-in-depth. No visible incident response or security policy information is provided, which could be improved to enhance transparency and readiness. The contact form collects sensitive personal and property data, so ensuring secure backend processing and data protection is critical. No known vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analyzed content. Overall, security practices are moderate but could benefit from enhancements in headers, policies, and cookie consent compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers (CSP, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to improve protection against common web attacks.
  2. Add a clear cookie consent banner and cookie policy to comply fully with GDPR and ePrivacy regulations.
  3. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and trust.
  4. Regularly audit and update WordPress plugins and themes to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all visitors.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Laskana
Description
Mežu apsaimniekošana, transports un loģistika (kokmateriāli, šķelda), mežu, cirsmu, šķeldas, kokmateriālu iepirkšana u. c.
Key services
Mežu apsaimniekošana (Forest management), Kokmateriālu iepirkšana (Wood material purchasing), Kokmateriālu transports un loģistika (Wood transport and logistics), Stividora pakalpojumi (Stevedoring services), Remontdarbnīca (Repair workshop services)
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.8.2, jQuery 3.7.1, Google Tag Manager, Contact Form 7 plugin, Yoast SEO plugin, AccelerateWP, Rocket Lazy Load Scripts
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
fast
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA on forms
  • Lazy loading of scripts and images to improve performance

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and multimedia
  2. Uses modern WordPress CMS with SEO and performance optimizations
  3. Includes multiple service offerings related to forestry and logistics
  4. Contact form collects personal and property-related data with file uploads
  5. No explicit privacy or cookie consent banner detected
  6. Social media presence on Facebook and Instagram
  7. No visible security policy or incident response information
  8. WHOIS data unavailable due to query limit error
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 6.8.2 with jQuery 3.7.1 and uses popular plugins such as Contact Form 7 and Yoast SEO. Performance optimizations include lazy loading of images and scripts, and Google Tag Manager integration for analytics and marketing. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and good navigation clarity. No hosting provider information was detected. The technical implementation is modern and well-maintained, supporting a fast and user-friendly experience. Opportunities exist to improve security headers and cookie consent mechanisms to align with best practices and compliance requirements.
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 laskana.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 laskana.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.