Skip to main content

Security report for lhj.lv

Light House Hotel · Hospitality · Latvia

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

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Light House Hotel is a boutique hospitality business located in Jurmala, Latvia, offering uniquely themed guestrooms inspired by various countries, complemented by a Mediterranean cuisine restaurant and banquet services. The website presents a professional and consistent brand image targeting tourists seeking a distinctive lodging experience by the Riga Gulf. The technical infrastructure is based on SilverStripe CMS with common JavaScript libraries and includes Google Analytics for visitor tracking. The site is mobile optimized with a cookie consent mechanism indicating GDPR awareness. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS implied but lacking visible security headers and explicit security policies. WHOIS data could not be retrieved due to query limits, limiting domain registration verification. Overall, the website is functional, trustworthy, and suitable for its business purpose.

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. 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.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

  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';…

  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 SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching lhj.lv

This scan found 22 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
75
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
75
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

The business operates in the hospitality sector with a boutique hotel model emphasizing themed rooms and premium dining. Its market position is niche, targeting travelers desiring unique accommodation experiences in Latvia. Revenue streams likely include room bookings, restaurant services, and event hosting. The company maintains an active social media presence on Facebook and Instagram, enhancing customer engagement. The website content and contact details are consistent with a small-sized hospitality business. No parent or subsidiary companies were identified. The business demonstrates moderate digital maturity with room for improvement in security and compliance transparency.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and a cookie consent banner, reflecting basic security and privacy practices. However, no security headers such as Content Security Policy or HSTS were detected, which could improve protection against common web attacks. There is no visible incident response or vulnerability disclosure information, which is a gap in security readiness. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were identified in the HTML content. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could benefit from enhanced headers, explicit policies, and incident response mechanisms to strengthen trust and compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and verify HTTP security headers including CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  2. Publish explicit security and incident response policies on the website to improve transparency and readiness.
  3. Add a terms of service page to clarify user agreements and legal protections.
  4. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all visitors.
  5. Regularly monitor and update third-party libraries and scripts to mitigate vulnerabilities.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Light House Hotel
Description
Boutique hotel in Jurmala, Latvia offering uniquely themed guestrooms representing different countries, Mediterranean cuisine restaurant, banquet services, and exclusive beach location.
Key services
Accommodation with themed rooms, Restaurant with Mediterranean cuisine, Banquets and celebrations, Beachfront location
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, jQuery UI, Owl Carousel, ResponsiveSlides, Google Analytics, CookieConsent
Frameworks
SilverStripe CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS usage (implied by base href https://)
  • Cookie consent banner

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, 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 uses SilverStripe CMS with modern JavaScript libraries.
  2. Cookie consent banner present indicating GDPR awareness.
  3. Contact information is complete and consistent with business location in Latvia.
  4. No visible security headers detected in HTML source.
  5. No WHOIS data available due to query limit error.
  6. No terms of service or explicit security policies found.
  7. Social media presence on Facebook and Instagram.
  8. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on SilverStripe CMS and uses popular JavaScript libraries such as jQuery, Owl Carousel, and ResponsiveSlides for UI components. Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager are integrated for visitor tracking. The site is mobile responsive and includes a cookie consent mechanism. Performance is moderate with no major issues detected in the HTML content. SEO is basic with meta description and alternate language links present. Accessibility is basic with some ARIA roles used. Hosting provider details are not disclosed. There is an opportunity to improve technical SEO, accessibility, and security headers to enhance overall site robustness.
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 lhj.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 lhj.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.