Skip to main content

Security report for leme.lv

Other · N/a

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

Security score

59/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website leme.lv is currently inaccessible to normal visitors due to a security CAPTCHA challenge page implemented by BitNinja, a cybersecurity service. This page is designed to block automated or malicious traffic and requires users to complete a CAPTCHA to proceed. As a result, no business or product information is available on the site, and the content is limited to security validation messaging. The technical infrastructure includes legacy CMS indicators (Joomla 1.5 and WordPress 2.5 meta tags) and modern tracking technologies such as Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager. The security posture shows some strengths in using BitNinja and reCAPTCHA for bot mitigation but lacks visible security headers and privacy policies. WHOIS data is unavailable due to query limits, limiting trust verification. Overall, the site is in a blocked state, preventing comprehensive analysis of business and security details.

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

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 leme.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
20
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
10
Average
59

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

Due to the blocking by BitNinja, no direct business intelligence can be gathered from the website content. There are no contact details, privacy policies, or company information presented. The presence of BitNinja suggests a focus on security, but the outdated CMS meta tags indicate potential legacy infrastructure. The target audience appears to be general web visitors attempting to access the site. No partnerships or related domains are identified from the content. The lack of accessible business information limits insights into market positioning, revenue streams, or growth indicators.

Security posture

The security posture is moderate with the use of BitNinja's greylist and Google reCAPTCHA v2 to prevent automated malicious access. However, the absence of visible security headers (such as CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options) and lack of privacy or cookie policies are notable gaps. The SSL/TLS configuration could not be assessed from the provided data. The site does not expose sensitive data or vulnerable libraries in the visible content, but the legacy CMS versions may pose risks if still in use. Incident response and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are not evident. Overall, the security measures focus on access control but lack transparency and comprehensive security best practices.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and expose comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Upgrade CMS platforms to supported, secure versions to reduce legacy vulnerabilities.
  3. Add and enforce security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options.
  4. Improve SSL/TLS configuration and ensure HTTPS is enforced site-wide.
  5. Provide clear business and contact information to enhance credibility and user confidence.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

BitNinja detected. The website content is blocked by BitNinja security service with a CAPTCHA challenge to prevent automated or malicious access. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Description
This page is a security CAPTCHA challenge page designed to block automated or malicious traffic. It does not provide business or product information.
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, reCAPTCHA v2, BitNinja security
Frameworks
Joomla 1.5, WordPress 2.5 (meta tags only)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
30/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA v2
  • BitNinja greylist IP blocking

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
basic
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website is currently blocked by a security CAPTCHA challenge from BitNinja.
  2. No business or product information is accessible on the page.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  4. No contact information or company details are provided.
  5. The site uses outdated CMS meta tags (Joomla 1.5, WordPress 2.5) indicating possible legacy infrastructure.
  6. Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager are used for tracking.
  7. No visible security headers or SSL configuration details available.
  8. WHOIS data is unavailable due to query limit error.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses legacy CMS meta tags indicating Joomla 1.5 and WordPress 2.5, suggesting outdated infrastructure. Modern tracking technologies like Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager are integrated. The site is protected by BitNinja's security service, which presents a CAPTCHA challenge to visitors, blocking direct content access. The page is moderately optimized for mobile but lacks advanced accessibility and SEO features. No hosting provider information is discernible. The performance is moderate, but the blocking mechanism impacts user experience and content availability. Technical debt is evident due to legacy CMS references and missing modern security headers.
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 leme.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 leme.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.