Skip to main content

Security report for lgs.lv

Latvijas Gaisa Satiksme · Transportation · Latvia

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

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Latvijas Gaisa Satiksme (LGS) is a Latvian air navigation service provider offering a range of aviation-related services including aeronautical information, training, and commercial air traffic coordination. The website is professionally designed, multilingual (Latvian and English), and targets aviation professionals and related stakeholders. The business model focuses on providing essential air traffic services and regulatory compliance within Latvia. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with modern frameworks like Bootstrap and uses Google Analytics for visitor insights. Cookie consent is implemented with a comprehensive mechanism ensuring GDPR compliance. Security posture is good with HTTPS enforced and cookie consent blocking, though some HTTP security headers are missing. No WHOIS data was available due to query limits, limiting domain trust analysis. Overall, the website presents a credible and professional digital presence for a national transportation entity.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 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 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';…

  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

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

Keep watching lgs.lv

This scan found 24 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
67
Security headers
15
Email security
65
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
68

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

LGS operates in the transportation sector, specifically air navigation services in Latvia. The company offers key services such as aeronautical information, integrated information systems, tariff calculators, drone flight coordination, and commercial aviation services. The website content and structure indicate a medium-sized organization with a focus on safety, quality, and compliance. The presence of detailed corporate information, privacy policies, and cookie consent mechanisms reflect a mature approach to regulatory compliance and user trust. The business targets aviation professionals, government bodies, and commercial clients, positioning itself as a national authority in air traffic management.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses cookie consent with blocking mode, which is a strong privacy and security practice. Google Analytics is used with an opt-out mechanism, indicating attention to user privacy. However, the absence of explicit HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and HSTS reduces the overall security posture. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. The lack of a security.txt or vulnerability disclosure page suggests room for improvement in incident response transparency. Overall, the security maturity is good but could be enhanced with additional headers and formal vulnerability disclosure.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTP security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and HSTS to strengthen security posture.
  2. Publish a security.txt file to provide clear vulnerability disclosure and incident response contact information.
  3. Enhance accessibility features to meet higher standards for users with disabilities.
  4. Regularly update WordPress core and plugins to mitigate risks from outdated software.
  5. Consider adding explicit contact information such as company emails and phone numbers on the website for improved business credibility.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Latvijas Gaisa Satiksme
Description
Latvijas Gaisa Satiksme (LGS) is a transportation entity focused on air traffic services in Latvia, providing aeronautical information, training, and commercial services related to air navigation and unmanned aerial vehicle coordination.
Key services
Aeronavigācijas informācijas pakalpojumi, IBS (Integrētā informācijas sistēma), Tarifi un pakalpojumu kalkulators, Bezpilota gaisa kuģu lidojumu koordinēšana, Komercpakalpojumi, Apmācības
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 5.3.18, Google Analytics by MonsterInsights, jQuery UI, Bootstrap 4.3.1, Cookiebot
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced via script redirect
  • Cookie consent with blocking mode
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google
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 uses HTTPS and enforces redirect to HTTPS.
  2. Cookie consent is implemented with detailed cookie categories and descriptions.
  3. No explicit contact emails or phone numbers found in the provided HTML snippet.
  4. Privacy policy is present and detailed, in Latvian language.
  5. No terms of service or security policy pages explicitly found.
  6. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found.
  7. Website is built on WordPress with common plugins and libraries.
  8. Google Analytics is used for visitor tracking with opt-out mechanism.
  9. No signs of WAF or content blocking detected.
  10. WHOIS data unavailable due to query limit error.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 5.3.18, using Bootstrap 4.3.1 for responsive design and jQuery UI for UI components. Google Fonts and CDN-hosted libraries are used for performance optimization. Cookiebot manages cookie consent with detailed categories and blocking capabilities. Google Analytics is integrated for visitor tracking with opt-out functionality. The site enforces HTTPS via a client-side redirect script. Performance appears moderate with caching and minified CSS/JS assets. Mobile optimization is good with responsive menus and layouts. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and alternate language links. Accessibility is basic but could be improved. No hosting provider or server details were identified from the HTML content.
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 lgs.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 lgs.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.