Skip to main content

Security report for rdsd.lv

Rīgas valstpilsētas pašvaldības Ārtelpas un mobilitātes departaments · Government · Latvia

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website rdsd.lv serves as the official online presence of the Riga City Council's Department of Urban Environment and Mobility. It provides comprehensive information on urban mobility projects, traffic management, infrastructure development, and public services related to transportation within Riga. The site targets residents, visitors, government officials, and contractors involved in city planning and mobility. The business model is that of a government service provider focused on municipal urban mobility and infrastructure management. Technically, the website employs standard web technologies such as HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript, with a moderate performance profile and good mobile optimization. The site lacks advanced frameworks or CMS indications and does not show evidence of third-party analytics or advertising scripts, indicating a focus on informational content without commercial tracking. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS but lacks visible security headers and explicit incident response or vulnerability disclosure information. No WHOIS data was available due to query limits, but the domain and content strongly suggest a legitimate government entity. Privacy and cookie policies are present but lack active consent mechanisms. Overall, the security posture is moderate with room for improvement in headers and compliance features. The overall risk assessment is low, with no suspicious content or vulnerabilities detected. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security headers, implementing cookie consent mechanisms, improving accessibility, and publishing incident response policies to strengthen trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
40/ 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

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 Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

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

  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 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 rdsd.lv

This scan found 25 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
62
Security headers
30
Email security
70
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
40
Average
60

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

RDSD.lv operates as a government entity under the Riga City Council, focusing on urban mobility and infrastructure. Its market position is that of an essential municipal department providing critical public services. The business model is non-commercial, funded by the city government, targeting local residents and stakeholders in urban planning. The website content reflects ongoing infrastructure projects, traffic updates, and public engagement initiatives. The partnership ecosystem includes related government domains such as riga.lv and rigassatiksme.lv. Growth indicators include active project updates and public communication. The site lacks commercial revenue streams or affiliate partnerships, consistent with its government role.

Security posture

The security maturity of the website is moderate. HTTPS is used, but no advanced security headers are detected in the HTML content. There is no visible incident response or vulnerability disclosure information, which limits transparency in security practices. Privacy policies are present and appear GDPR compliant, but cookie consent mechanisms are missing. No tracking or analytics scripts reduce privacy risks but also limit user behavior insights. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerabilities were found in the HTML. The absence of WHOIS data due to query limits is noted but not suspicious given the official nature of the site. Overall, the site would benefit from enhanced security headers, explicit incident response information, and improved privacy compliance mechanisms.

Recommendations

  1. Implement security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to improve protection against common web attacks.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner or mechanism to comply fully with GDPR and enhance user privacy transparency.
  3. Publish an incident response policy and contact channels to improve security transparency and readiness.
  4. Enhance website accessibility features to meet recognized standards and improve user experience for all visitors.
  5. Consider integrating minimal analytics with privacy-respecting configurations to monitor site usage and improve services.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Rīgas valstpilsētas pašvaldības Ārtelpas un mobilitātes departaments
Description
The website represents the Riga City Council's Department of Urban Environment and Mobility, providing information about urban mobility projects, traffic restrictions, infrastructure development, and public services related to transportation and city planning in Riga.
Key services
Traffic management and restrictions, Urban infrastructure projects, Public transport information, Licensing and permits for transport, Information dissemination and public engagement
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
60/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of HTTPS (implied by URL)
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is an official municipal department site for Riga city focused on urban mobility and infrastructure.
  2. Content is in Latvian and well-structured with clear navigation.
  3. No WHOIS data available due to query limit error; no suspicious content detected.
  4. No visible security headers or advanced security policies in HTML.
  5. No tracking or advertising scripts detected.
  6. No social media links found in the HTML content.
  7. Contact information includes phone numbers and contact forms but no explicit emails visible.
  8. No privacy or cookie consent banners detected despite presence of policies.
  9. No terms of service page found.
  10. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information found.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a simple technology stack with HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript. There is no indication of a CMS or advanced frameworks. The site is moderately optimized for mobile devices and has a clear navigation structure. Performance is average with no visible heavy scripts or third-party dependencies. The absence of analytics or advertising scripts suggests a focus on privacy and informational content. Technical debt appears low, but the lack of security headers and cookie consent mechanisms indicates areas for modernization. Hosting provider and infrastructure details are not discernible from the HTML content.
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 rdsd.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 rdsd.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.