Skip to main content

Security report for riafinancial.com

Continental Exchange Solutions, Inc. · Finance · Finland

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

51/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Ria Financial Services operates a global money transfer platform, providing services to individuals and businesses for sending and receiving money internationally. The company maintains a strong market presence with localized country-specific websites and a corporate section, supported by a parent company, Euronet Worldwide, Inc. The website is built on the Liferay CMS platform, leveraging modern web technologies such as jQuery and Bootstrap, and includes multi-language support and a cookie consent mechanism to comply with privacy regulations. However, a critical security deficiency is the absence of a valid SSL certificate and TLS support, which severely impacts the security posture and user trust. While privacy and cookie policies are comprehensive and GDPR compliant, the lack of HTTPS undermines data protection efforts. The site includes social media integration and a contact form with CAPTCHA to mitigate spam. Overall, the website demonstrates good business credibility and content quality but requires urgent security improvements to meet industry standards.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
43/ 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

4 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

  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 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';…

  3. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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

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

Keep watching riafinancial.com

This scan found 15 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. See sample alerts.

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
60
Email security
50
DNS health
50
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
43
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

The company targets a broad audience needing money transfer services, including individual consumers and potential business agents. Its business model focuses on financial transactions, agent partnerships, and career opportunities, supported by a global network. The presence of multiple country subdomains indicates a strategy for localized service delivery. The parent company relationship with Euronet Worldwide adds legitimacy and scale. The website content is professionally presented with clear navigation and relevant service information. Marketing and analytics tools like Google Tag Manager are employed for user behavior tracking and campaign effectiveness. The company maintains active social media channels to engage customers and enhance brand visibility.

Security posture

The website's security posture is weak due to the lack of a valid SSL certificate and absence of TLS protocol support, exposing users to potential data interception and man-in-the-middle attacks. While some security headers are implemented (X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, X-XSS-Protection, HSTS), the incomplete SSL/TLS configuration is a critical vulnerability. No explicit security policy or incident response information is available, which limits transparency and preparedness. The contact form uses CAPTCHA to reduce spam, but secure transmission of data is compromised without HTTPS. The site does not implement advanced security features like OCSP stapling or session resumption. Immediate remediation is necessary to protect user data and comply with security best practices.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 or TLS 1.3) and configure strong cipher suites.
  3. Implement OCSP stapling and session resumption to improve SSL performance and security.
  4. Publish a clear security policy and incident response plan accessible to users.
  5. Regularly audit and update security headers and conduct vulnerability assessments.
  6. Enhance accessibility features and mobile optimization for broader user reach.
  7. Maintain transparency in data protection practices and update privacy notices as needed.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Liferay Community Edition Portal 7.2.1 CE GA2, using jQuery, Bootstrap, and Modernizr for frontend functionality. The site supports multiple languages and country-specific versions, indicating a scalable CMS configuration. Performance metrics are not available, but the presence of combined and minified resources suggests optimization efforts. Accessibility is basic, with skip navigation links and ARIA roles present. SEO is supported through canonical and hreflang tags. However, the absence of a valid SSL certificate and TLS support is a major technical risk. Hosting provider details are not explicitly identified. The site uses Google Tag Manager for analytics and tracking. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern but requires security enhancements to align with best practices.
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 riafinancial.com. 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 riafinancial.com.

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.