Skip to main content

Security report for partneriba.lv

Biedrība “Cēsu rajona lauku partnerība” · Non-profit · Latvia

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

57/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website www.partneriba.lv represents Biedrība “Cēsu rajona lauku partnerība”, a small non-profit organization focused on rural development and community partnership in the Cēsis region of Latvia. The organization supports LEADER projects and local initiatives, targeting local community members and rural businesses. The website content is primarily in Latvian and provides information about upcoming events, news, and contact details. The business model revolves around facilitating community development through project funding and engagement. Technically, the website is built on WordPress 6.4.3 with common plugins such as Yoast SEO, Google Analytics, and Google reCAPTCHA. The site uses HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate, ensuring secure communication. The design is professional and mobile-optimized, with good SEO practices and basic accessibility features. However, some security headers are missing, and there is room for improvement in accessibility and security policy disclosures. From a security perspective, the site employs HTTPS and reCAPTCHA on forms, and it has a cookie consent mechanism indicating GDPR awareness. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the provided content. The WHOIS data could not be retrieved due to query limits, limiting domain registration verification. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be enhanced by adding security headers and publishing incident response policies. The overall risk assessment is low, with the website appearing legitimate and professionally maintained. Strategic recommendations include improving security headers, enhancing accessibility, and publishing formal security and incident response policies to strengthen trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 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

7 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

    • 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

  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 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 partneriba.lv

This scan found 21 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
72
Security headers
50
Email security
70
DNS health
85
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
25
Average
57

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 organization operates as a regional non-profit entity supporting rural development through the LEADER program in Latvia. Its competitive advantage lies in its local focus and official backing by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Support Service. The business model is grant and project-based, targeting local rural communities and stakeholders. Revenue streams likely include government and EU funding. The partnership ecosystem includes local authorities and community groups. Growth indicators include active event calendars and ongoing project announcements. The website reflects a stable presence with consistent branding and community engagement.

Security posture

The current security maturity is moderate. The site uses HTTPS and Google reCAPTCHA to protect forms, and it has a cookie consent banner supporting privacy compliance. However, the absence of key security headers (e.g., Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options) and lack of published security policies or incident response plans indicate gaps. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found in the analysis. GDPR compliance is partially addressed via cookie consent and privacy policy. Incident response readiness and data protection officer contact are not evident. Overall, the security culture appears basic but functional for a small non-profit.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Publish a security policy and incident response plan on the website to improve transparency and preparedness.
  3. Regularly update WordPress core and plugins to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  4. Enhance accessibility features to improve usability for all users.
  5. Add a security.txt file to facilitate vulnerability disclosure and improve security communication.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Biedrība “Cēsu rajona lauku partnerība”
Registration number
40008104938
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Biedrība “Cēsu rajona lauku partnerība”
Description
Cēsu rajona lauku partnerība is a non-profit organization focused on rural development and community partnership in the Cēsis region of Latvia. It supports LEADER projects and local initiatives.
Key services
LEADER project funding, Community partnership facilitation, Event organization, Information dissemination
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.4.3, Yoast SEO plugin, Google Analytics, Google reCAPTCHA, jQuery, Swiper.js, LazyLoad, jsCalendar
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA on forms
  • Cookie consent banner implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
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 is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is in Latvian language targeting local community.
  3. Uses HTTPS with valid SSL certificate.
  4. Includes cookie consent banner and privacy policy page.
  5. No visible security headers detected in provided data.
  6. WHOIS data unavailable due to query limit error.
  7. Contact information is clearly provided including phone, email, and physical address.
  8. Website uses modern WordPress CMS with common plugins.
  9. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
  10. Social media links present but point to root domain '/' indicating placeholders or missing URLs.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress CMS platform with version 6.4.3, using popular plugins like Yoast SEO for search optimization and Google Analytics for traffic monitoring. The front-end uses JavaScript libraries such as jQuery, Swiper.js for sliders, and LazyLoad for image optimization. The site loads asynchronously scripts for performance and includes Google reCAPTCHA for form security. The design is responsive and mobile-friendly. Performance is moderate with room for optimization. No hosting provider details were found. Technical debt appears low, but security enhancements and accessibility improvements are recommended 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 partneriba.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 partneriba.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.