Skip to main content

Security report for piksper.lv

Technology · N/a

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

The website piksper.lv currently serves as a security CAPTCHA challenge page powered by BitNinja, designed to prevent automated bot access and mitigate cybercrime risks. It does not present typical business content but instead focuses on validating human visitors through Google reCAPTCHA integration. The page includes multilingual support and branding consistent with BitNinja's security services. Due to the nature of the page, no direct business information or contact details are provided. Technically, the site uses standard web technologies including HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, and integrates Google Analytics and Tag Manager for tracking. The presence of legacy CMS meta tags (Joomla 1.5 and WordPress 2.5) suggests either outdated remnants or placeholders, which could pose security risks if active. The site is hosted behind BitNinja's security platform and uses Cloudflare Insights for performance monitoring. From a security perspective, the site employs CAPTCHA to block malicious automated traffic but lacks visible security headers and explicit SSL/TLS configuration details. No privacy or cookie policies are present on this page, limiting compliance transparency. WHOIS data is unavailable due to query limits, but the domain appears privacy protected, which is reasonable for a security-focused service. Overall, the site is primarily a security checkpoint rather than a business-facing website, limiting content and business credibility assessment. The security posture is moderate due to CAPTCHA use but could be improved with modern security headers and updated CMS components. Privacy compliance and contact transparency are lacking, and the site is effectively blocked for automated analysis.

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 piksper.lv

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. 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
75
Security headers
20
Email security
70
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

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

Given the page's function as a BitNinja security CAPTCHA challenge, the business intelligence is limited. BitNinja is a known cybersecurity provider specializing in bot mitigation and IP greylist management. The page targets general internet users attempting to access protected resources, aiming to filter out malicious automated traffic. There is no direct indication of revenue streams or detailed market positioning on this page. The presence of multiple language translations suggests a global or multi-regional audience. No partnerships or subsidiaries are indicated. The business model revolves around cybersecurity services, likely B2B, but this page itself is a technical gate rather than a commercial landing page.

Security posture

The security posture of the page is focused on bot mitigation using Google reCAPTCHA and BitNinja's greylist IP management. However, the absence of visible security headers (such as CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options) and lack of explicit SSL/TLS configuration details are notable gaps. The use of legacy CMS meta tags raises concerns about potential outdated software exposure if active. No privacy or cookie policies are present, which is a compliance gap. Incident response and security contact information are not provided. Overall, the security measures are functional for the page's purpose but could be enhanced for broader compliance and defense in depth.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce modern HTTP security headers including Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection.
  2. Ensure the entire site is served over HTTPS with strong SSL/TLS configurations and regularly audited certificates.
  3. Remove or upgrade legacy CMS components to eliminate known vulnerabilities and reduce attack surface.
  4. Publish clear privacy and cookie policies to improve GDPR and other privacy regulation compliance.
  5. Provide visible contact information including security incident response contacts to enhance transparency and trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

BitNinja detected. The page is a security challenge page by BitNinja with CAPTCHA to block automated/bot access. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Description
This page is a security CAPTCHA challenge page presented by BitNinja to validate visitors and prevent automated malicious access.
Key services
IP greylist management, bot mitigation, cybercrime prevention
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Google reCAPTCHA v2, BitNinja security platform, Cloudflare Insights beacon
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
40/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA for bot mitigation
  • IP greylist removal process via CAPTCHA validation

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Cloudflare Insights
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Cloudflare Insights
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
basic
User experience
basic
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
basic
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website content is a security CAPTCHA challenge page by BitNinja.
  2. No WHOIS data available due to query limit error.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on this page.
  4. No contact information or business details provided.
  5. Legacy CMS meta tags present but likely not indicative of active CMS use.
  6. Multiple external tracking and analytics scripts detected.
  7. No explicit security headers or SSL info available.
  8. Page is designed to block automated/bot traffic and validate human visitors.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a standard HTML5 and CSS3 structure with JavaScript for dynamic language translation and CAPTCHA integration. Google Analytics and Tag Manager scripts are embedded for user tracking and analytics. The CAPTCHA is implemented via Google reCAPTCHA v2 with a site key. The page is styled with custom CSS and includes a BitNinja logo embedded as a base64 image. The presence of Joomla 1.5 and WordPress 2.5 meta tags suggests legacy CMS usage or remnants, which should be reviewed. Hosting details are not explicit, but Cloudflare Insights beacon indicates Cloudflare services are involved. Performance is moderate with basic mobile optimization and accessibility features. SEO optimization is minimal due to the page's nature as a security challenge rather than content-rich site.
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 piksper.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 piksper.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.