Skip to main content

Security report for louana.com

Ventura Foods, LLC · Retail · United States

Low risk. 4 critical or high findings in Email security, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

76/100

Risk levelLow

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

LouAna.com represents the digital presence of LouAna Oils, a well-established brand under Ventura Foods, LLC, specializing in cooking oils and related recipe content. The website targets consumers interested in cooking and beauty uses of oils, offering product information, recipes, tips, and beauty advice. The business model combines product retail with content marketing to engage and retain customers. Technically, the site is built on WordPress, leveraging common plugins and third-party marketing tools, hosted via WP Engine and protected by Cloudflare. Performance and mobile optimization are good, with SEO practices supported by Yoast SEO plugin. Security posture is moderate with valid SSL certificates and several security headers implemented; however, the lack of modern TLS protocols and disabled X-XSS-Protection header reduce the overall security score. No cookie consent mechanism or explicit GDPR compliance is evident, and no incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are published. The site integrates multiple marketing and tracking tools including Google Analytics, Facebook and Pinterest pixels, and affiliate marketing via Hopster. Overall, LouAna.com is a professionally maintained retail and content site with room for security and privacy enhancements.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
43/ 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

4 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. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  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 louana.com

This scan found 15 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
65
Security headers
90
Email security
75
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
43
Average
76

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

LouAna operates as a large retail and manufacturing brand focused on cooking oils, leveraging its parent company Ventura Foods, LLC. The company maintains a strong market position with a consistent brand and a diversified product portfolio including avocado, coconut, peanut, canola, and vegetable oils. The website supports business growth through recipe content and tips, targeting home cooks and health-conscious consumers. Partnerships include affiliate marketing with Hopster and social media engagement across Facebook, Instagram, and Pinterest. The business model emphasizes product sales supported by digital marketing and content engagement. The absence of direct contact emails or phone numbers on the homepage suggests a controlled customer interaction channel via contact forms. The company’s digital ecosystem is mature but could benefit from enhanced privacy and security compliance to meet evolving regulatory requirements.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with a valid SSL certificate and implementation of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, HSTS with includeSubDomains, and X-Frame-Options. However, the absence of TLS 1.2 or higher protocols and the disabling of the X-XSS-Protection header indicate potential vulnerabilities to modern attack vectors. No explicit security policy, incident response plan, or vulnerability disclosure mechanism is publicly available, which may impact trust and compliance. The site uses secure cookie flags (HttpOnly, Secure, SameSite=None) but lacks a cookie consent mechanism, raising GDPR compliance concerns. The DNS configuration does not include DNSSEC, which could improve domain security. Overall, while basic security best practices are followed, there are critical areas for improvement to enhance the security posture and regulatory compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Enable TLS 1.2 or higher protocols to ensure secure communications.
  2. Activate and properly configure the X-XSS-Protection header to mitigate cross-site scripting risks.
  3. Implement a cookie consent banner and mechanism to comply with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  4. Publish a security policy and vulnerability disclosure page (security.txt) to improve transparency and incident response readiness.
  5. Enable DNSSEC for the domain to protect against DNS spoofing and improve domain security.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with a technology stack including jQuery, Slider Revolution, FontAwesome, AddThis, and PixelYourSite plugins. Hosting is provided by WP Engine with Cloudflare as a CDN and security layer. Performance is fast with good mobile optimization and SEO supported by Yoast SEO plugin. The site uses multiple third-party marketing and tracking tools, including Google Analytics and Facebook Pixel, indicating a mature digital marketing infrastructure. However, the lack of modern TLS protocols and some disabled security headers suggest technical debt in security configuration. The site’s technical infrastructure is stable but would benefit from modernization of security protocols and enhanced privacy controls to reduce operational risks.
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 louana.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 louana.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.