Skip to main content

Security report for llt-services.com

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

58/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The domain llt-services.com is registered with OVH sas since 2021 and uses Microsoft Azure DNS hosting. However, the website is currently inaccessible, returning only a 404 Not Found error page served by Microsoft-Azure-Application-Gateway/v2. There is no visible content, metadata, or business information available on the site. This lack of content prevents any meaningful analysis of the company's business model, services, or market position. Technically, the site appears to be hosted on a reputable cloud platform but lacks any visible CMS, scripts, or technologies. Security posture cannot be assessed due to missing HTTPS and security headers information. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies are present, indicating non-compliance with common privacy regulations. Overall, the site is non-functional and provides no trust or credibility signals.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
40/ 100 · High
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. 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. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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

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

Keep watching llt-services.com

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. 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
77
Security headers
15
Email security
40
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
40
Average
58

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 absence of accessible content, no business intelligence can be derived from the website. The domain age and registrar information suggest a legitimate registration, but no details about the company, its services, or market presence are available. There are no indications of partnerships, certifications, or business sectors served.

Security posture

The security posture is unknown due to the lack of accessible content and absence of HTTPS or security headers data. The site does not present any visible forms or data collection mechanisms, reducing immediate risk exposure. However, the lack of privacy and security policies is a compliance gap. The domain uses Azure DNS, which is a positive indicator, but no further security best practices are observable.

Recommendations

  1. Deploy a functional website with proper content and metadata to enable comprehensive analysis.
  2. Enable HTTPS with valid SSL/TLS certificates to secure communications.
  3. Implement standard security headers to improve security posture.
  4. Publish privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies to comply with GDPR and other regulations.
  5. Provide clear contact information and business details to enhance trust and credibility.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. Website returns a 404 Not Found error page served by Microsoft-Azure-Application-Gateway/v2, indicating no accessible content and likely blocking or misconfiguration. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Platforms
Microsoft Azure
Performance
moderate
Mobile
poor
Accessibility
poor
SEO
poor

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website content is inaccessible, showing only a 404 error page.
  2. No metadata, structured data, or business information is present in the HTML.
  3. No contact information, policies, or security disclosures found.
  4. Domain registration is valid and consistent but website is not operational.
  5. No external links, forms, or scripts detected due to minimal content.
  6. Security posture cannot be assessed due to lack of content and HTTPS information.
  7. WAF or security blocking is not explicitly detected, but the site is effectively inaccessible.
  8. Analysis incomplete due to lack of accessible content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is hosted on Microsoft Azure infrastructure as indicated by the Azure DNS and the Azure Application Gateway error page. No CMS, frameworks, or scripts are detected due to the absence of content. The site returns a 404 error, indicating either misconfiguration or that the site is not yet deployed. Performance and accessibility cannot be assessed. There is an opportunity to modernize and properly configure the site to improve technical maturity.
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 llt-services.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 llt-services.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.