Skip to main content

Security report for reatonfood.eu

Reaton · Retail · Latvia

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

51/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Reaton is a medium-sized Latvian company operating in the food retail and distribution sector, targeting business customers such as retail stores and the HoReCa segment. The website serves as a B2B platform providing information about their services including logistics and product supply. The digital infrastructure is based on WordPress CMS with common front-end libraries such as Bootstrap, jQuery, and Mapbox for mapping. The site is moderately optimized for mobile and SEO but lacks advanced content richness and business contact details. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled and secure AJAX form submissions, but lacks important security headers and explicit incident response or security policies. Privacy compliance is basic with a privacy policy and cookie consent banner present, though GDPR compliance indicators are minimal. WHOIS data could not be retrieved, limiting domain legitimacy assessment. Overall, the website is functional but could improve in content depth, security hardening, and transparency to enhance trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
28/ 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

8 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 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 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 reatonfood.eu

This scan found 26 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
72
Security headers
15
Email security
80
DNS health
70
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
28
Average
51

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

Reaton positions itself as a food distribution and logistics provider within Latvia, focusing on business customers including retail and HoReCa sectors. The business model is B2B with services including supply chain logistics and product distribution. The website content and structure suggest a medium-sized enterprise with moderate digital maturity. The company maintains a YouTube channel for marketing but lacks visible contact details or certifications on the site. The absence of detailed business registration or compliance information limits external validation. The technology stack is standard for SMEs using WordPress and common JS libraries. Growth potential could be enhanced by improving digital presence and transparency.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and secure AJAX form submissions, which are positive security practices. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options reduces the overall security posture. No explicit security or incident response policies are published, and no vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files are present. The site does not expose sensitive data in HTML, but the lack of visible contact information and WHOIS data limits trust. Privacy compliance is minimal with only a basic privacy policy and cookie consent banner. Overall, the security maturity is moderate but could be significantly improved by implementing security headers, publishing security policies, and enhancing privacy compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  2. Publish detailed privacy and security policies including GDPR compliance statements and incident response procedures.
  3. Add visible and verified company contact information including emails and phone numbers to improve trust and compliance.
  4. Obtain and display relevant certifications or trust badges to enhance business credibility.
  5. Improve WHOIS data availability and domain registration transparency to strengthen legitimacy and trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Reaton
Description
Reaton operates in the food sector offering products related to food and delicacies. The website targets business customers including retail stores and HoReCa segments.
Key services
Food distribution, Logistics, Retail store supply, HoReCa supply
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
jQuery 3.5.1, Bootstrap 4.1.3, Mapbox GL JS v0.49.0, FancyBox 3.5.6, Slick Carousel, LightSlider, Owl Carousel, WordPress 5.5.15
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
65/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Secure form submission via AJAX
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible with no blocking or WAF challenge.
  2. WHOIS data unavailable due to query limit error.
  3. Website uses WordPress CMS with common plugins and libraries.
  4. No explicit contact emails or phone numbers found in visible content.
  5. Privacy policy and cookie consent banner present but minimal detail.
  6. No terms of service or security/incident response policies found.
  7. No explicit business registration or certification information found.
  8. Social media presence limited to YouTube channel link.
  9. Forms present for newsletter subscription and product order with client-side validation and AJAX submission.
  10. No security headers detected in HTML source.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 5.5.15 with Bootstrap 4.1.3 and jQuery 3.5.1, supplemented by various JS libraries for UI components and mapping (Mapbox GL JS). The site loads resources over HTTPS and uses AJAX for form submissions, indicating a modern approach to interactivity. Performance is moderate with standard CDN usage for libraries. Mobile optimization is good with responsive design via Bootstrap. SEO is basic with minimal meta tags and no Open Graph tags detected. Accessibility features are limited to basic emoji support and semantic HTML. The site lacks advanced security headers and detailed technical documentation. Hosting provider details are not discernible from the HTML content. Overall, the technical infrastructure is typical for a medium-sized WordPress site but could benefit from modernization and security enhancements.
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 reatonfood.eu. 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 reatonfood.eu.

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.