Skip to main content

Security report for petrow.lv

SIA Petrow · Other · Latvia

High risk. 10 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

34/100

Risk levelHigh

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

SIA Petrow is a Latvian legal office providing a wide range of professional legal services to both private individuals and corporate clients. The firm emphasizes expertise, responsibility, and professionalism, offering services in areas such as commercial law, insolvency, family law, insurance, labor law, and court representation. The website reflects a well-established business with a clear market position and a network of partners including sworn advocates and notaries. Technically, the website is built on WordPress using common plugins and tools like WPBakery, Google Analytics, and Contact Form 7, with moderate performance and good mobile optimization. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled but lacks advanced security headers and visible security policies. Privacy compliance is weak due to absence of privacy and cookie policies. WHOIS data is unavailable due to query limits, limiting domain trust verification. Overall, the website is professional and trustworthy but could improve in security and compliance areas.

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

10 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

  2. 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.

    • Critical

      Unable to retrieve SSL certificate

      Could not establish secure connection to retrieve certificate information

      What to do: Check if the server is accessible and SSL/TLS is properly configured

  3. 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 petrow.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. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

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
0
Security headers
15
Email security
85
DNS health
75
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
10
Average
34

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 company operates in the legal services sector in Latvia, targeting individuals and businesses needing legal assistance. Their business model focuses on providing consultations, document preparation, legal representation, and translation services. The firm positions itself as a reputable and professional legal office with a strong client focus and a broad service portfolio. Partnerships with sworn advocates and notaries enhance their service credibility. The website content and structure support their market positioning, though lack of privacy and cookie policies may affect compliance perception. The firm appears small-sized with a localized focus but with some international cooperation. No parent or subsidiary companies are identified.

Security posture

The website uses HTTPS and common security practices but lacks critical security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and HSTS. No explicit security or incident response policies are published. Contact forms are present but no visible anti-spam or advanced input validation mechanisms are evident. Absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates compliance gaps with GDPR and related regulations. WHOIS data is unavailable, reducing transparency and trust. Overall security maturity is moderate but improvements are needed to enhance protection and compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy with clear consent mechanisms.
  2. Add security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Ensure regular updates and security patches for WordPress and all plugins.
  4. Establish and publish an incident response policy and security contact information.
  5. Improve WHOIS transparency or use verified domain registration to enhance trust.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Juridiskais birojs Petrow SIA
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
SIA Petrow
Description
PETROW Juridiskais birojs is a recognized legal office in Latvia providing professional legal services to private individuals and legal entities. They emphasize knowledge, experience, responsibility, and professionalism to ensure high-quality and exclusive legal services. The firm offers representation in various legal fields including commercial law, insolvency, family law, insurance law, labor law, and more.
Key services
Administrative law, Sports law, Insolvency process, Real estate and environmental law, Family law, Commercial law, Debt collection, Translations, Labor law, Court representation
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, WPBakery Page Builder, Google Analytics, Contact Form 7, Jetpack, Google Tag Manager, ShareThis, FontAwesome, Material Icons
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
65/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Use of Google Tag Manager and analytics scripts loaded asynchronously

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Jetpack Stats
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Ad networks
Google AdSense
Tracking pixels
Jetpack Stats
Marketing tools
ShareThis
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professional legal services provider based in Latvia.
  2. Content is comprehensive and well-structured with clear service offerings.
  3. Contact information is prominently displayed including phone, email, addresses, and contact form.
  4. No privacy or cookie policy pages detected, indicating potential compliance gaps.
  5. No visible security headers or advanced security configurations detected.
  6. WHOIS data unavailable, limiting domain trust verification.
  7. Use of common WordPress plugins and technologies.
  8. No signs of adult or questionable content.
  9. Social media presence includes Facebook, WhatsApp, Telegram, Viber, Skype.
  10. Google Analytics and Jetpack used for analytics and tracking.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress with WPBakery Page Builder and uses standard plugins like Contact Form 7 and Jetpack. It integrates Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager for tracking and marketing. The site loads scripts asynchronously for performance. Mobile optimization is good, and SEO meta tags including Open Graph are properly configured. However, no advanced frameworks or custom backend technologies are detected. Hosting provider is not identified. Performance is moderate with room for optimization. Accessibility features are basic but present. Overall, the technical infrastructure is standard for a small professional services website.
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 petrow.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 petrow.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.