Skip to main content

Security report for markid.lt

Marksign · Technology · Lithuania

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

Marksign is a Lithuanian technology company specializing in electronic document management and digital signature solutions compliant with eIDAS regulations. Their platform targets businesses seeking secure and efficient digital workflows, positioning themselves as a regional player in the Baltic states. The website demonstrates a professional design with good content quality and clear navigation, supporting their business credibility. Technically, the site employs modern JavaScript libraries such as Microsoft Clarity for analytics and Google reCAPTCHA for form security, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforced and security headers present, though the absence of a cookie consent mechanism and public security policies suggests room for improvement in privacy compliance. Overall, the site is trustworthy and functional, but transparency could be enhanced by publishing WHOIS data and explicit security policies.

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 markid.lt

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
75
Security headers
15
Email security
75
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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention markid.lt, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for markid.lt right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

Monitor on Breach (opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Marksign operates a B2B SaaS model offering electronic signature and document management services primarily in Lithuania. Their competitive advantage lies in compliance with European digital signature standards (eIDAS) and a user-friendly platform. Revenue streams likely include subscription fees for different service tiers. The target customers are businesses undergoing digital transformation. The company maintains a professional online presence with testimonials and compliance indicators, but lacks visible certifications or extensive partner ecosystem information. Growth indicators are not explicitly stated. The company appears small in size with focused sector specialization in technology.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and includes key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options, reflecting good security hygiene. Use of Google reCAPTCHA protects forms from automated abuse. However, no public incident response or security policy pages were found, and no vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files are published, which limits transparency and readiness perception. Privacy compliance is partially addressed with a comprehensive privacy policy but lacks cookie consent mechanisms. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analysis. Overall, the security posture is good but could be strengthened by adding explicit security governance documentation and cookie consent.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a cookie consent banner to comply fully with GDPR and enhance user privacy transparency.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response information to improve trust and preparedness visibility.
  3. Consider adding a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting and transparency.
  4. Enhance contact information by including phone numbers and physical address to improve business credibility.
  5. Monitor WHOIS data availability and consider reducing privacy protection if appropriate to increase transparency.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Marksign
Description
Marksign provides electronic document management and digital signature solutions, targeting businesses seeking secure and efficient document workflows.
Key services
Electronic signatures, Document management, Compliance with eIDAS regulation
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Google reCAPTCHA, Microsoft Clarity, Swiper.js
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of reCAPTCHA for forms
  • Content Security Policy present

Analytics and tracking

Services
Microsoft Clarity
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Microsoft Clarity
Marketing tools
Marquiz
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. WHOIS data is unavailable due to query limits; no registrar or dates extracted.
  3. Website uses modern JavaScript libraries and tracking tools.
  4. Privacy policy is present and appears comprehensive and GDPR compliant.
  5. No explicit cookie consent mechanism detected.
  6. Contact information is available via email and contact form but no phone or physical address found.
  7. No terms of service or security policy pages explicitly found.
  8. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found.
  9. Website content is professional and focused on electronic document management and e-signatures.
  10. No suspicious external domains or links detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern frontend stack with JavaScript libraries including Microsoft Clarity for analytics and Google reCAPTCHA for bot protection. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and good SEO meta tags. No common CMS like WordPress or Joomla was detected, suggesting a custom or proprietary CMS. Performance is moderate with no major issues detected. Accessibility features are basic but present. The site uses Swiper.js for sliders and has a clean, professional layout. Hosting provider details are not discernible from the data. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a stable and user-friendly experience with opportunities to improve accessibility and privacy compliance.
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 markid.lt. 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 markid.lt.

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.