Skip to main content

Security report for rekini.lv

Unifiedpost · Finance · Latvia

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view.

Security score

69/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Rekini.lv operates as a Latvian digital invoicing and payment platform affiliated with Unifiedpost. It provides services for invoice receipt, payment, and invoice preparation via a partner platform Banqup. The website targets businesses and individuals in Latvia requiring invoicing solutions. Technically, the site uses a modern frontend stack including jQuery, Bootstrap, and multiple tracking and analytics services, but suffers from slow load times and lacks a valid SSL certificate, which critically impacts security. The security posture is weak due to missing HTTPS, absence of DMARC, DNSSEC, and domain protection locks. Privacy compliance is basic with a cookie consent modal and privacy policy present but no terms of service or incident response information. Overall, the site is functional but requires urgent security improvements to protect user data and enhance trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 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

5 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

    • 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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, Google APIs

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching rekini.lv

This scan found 19 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
97
Security headers
85
Email security
70
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
Average
69

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 business is positioned as a local invoicing platform with a clear partnership with Banqup for invoice sending. It leverages Unifiedpost branding, indicating a medium-sized operation in the finance and technology sectors. The business model is platform-based invoicing and payment facilitation. The website content and linked domains suggest a focus on Latvian market customers. The presence of multiple tracking and advertising tools indicates a data-driven marketing approach. Lack of phone contact and physical address on the site may limit direct customer engagement. The domain registration data is consistent and legitimate, supporting business credibility.

Security posture

The security maturity is low due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and modern TLS protocols, which exposes users to risks of data interception. The lack of DMARC and DNSSEC further weakens email and DNS security. HSTS is enabled but ineffective without HTTPS. No incident response or security policy information is provided, indicating limited transparency in security governance. The site uses multiple third-party trackers, raising privacy concerns. Immediate remediation of SSL and email security is recommended to reduce risk.

Recommendations

  1. Install and maintain a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the site.
  2. Implement DMARC, SPF, and DKIM email authentication to protect against phishing and spoofing.
  3. Enable DNSSEC to secure DNS queries and prevent spoofing.
  4. Add domain transfer protection locks to prevent unauthorized domain changes.
  5. Publish clear terms of service and security policy documents to improve transparency.
  6. Review and minimize third-party tracking to enhance user privacy compliance.
  7. Optimize website performance to reduce load times and improve user experience.
  8. Add visible contact phone numbers and physical address to improve business credibility.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a standard frontend stack with jQuery 3.7.1 and Bootstrap 4.3.1, supported by FontAwesome icons and Google Fonts. It integrates multiple marketing and analytics tools including Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, and Adform tracking. Hosting and DNS are managed by Unifiedpost with three authoritative name servers. The site lacks a valid SSL certificate and does not support any TLS versions, severely impacting security. Performance is poor with a page load time exceeding 11 seconds and a large page size (~1MB). The site is mobile optimized and uses responsive design but accessibility features are basic. SEO meta tags and Open Graph tags are properly implemented. No CMS or backend platform was detected. The technical debt includes outdated SSL configuration and heavy reliance on third-party trackers.
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 rekini.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 rekini.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.