Skip to main content

Security report for rigaportcity.lv

Riga Port City · Transportation · Latvia

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

64/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Riga Port City is a holding company focused on the redevelopment of the former Riga export port area into a vibrant urban district. The company manages several subsidiaries including Riga Passenger Port, Riga Waterfront, and Riga Ropax Terminal, positioning itself as a key player in Riga's real estate and transportation sectors. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand image with clear business descriptions and social media presence. Technically, the site uses modern frameworks like Nuxt.js and Swiper.js, with good mobile optimization and HTTPS security. However, the absence of visible security headers and cookie consent mechanisms indicates room for improvement in security and privacy compliance. The lack of explicit contact information and WHOIS data limits full verification of business credibility. Overall, the site is safe, business-focused, and moderately mature digitally.

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

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 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

  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 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 rigaportcity.lv

This scan found 21 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
75
Security headers
40
Email security
85
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
10
Average
64

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 operates in the real estate development and transportation sectors, targeting residents, visitors, and investors interested in Riga's urban waterfront transformation. Its business model revolves around property development and management, leveraging its subsidiaries to cover different aspects of port and waterfront assets. The presence at events like MIPIM 2025 suggests active market engagement and growth ambitions. The website's linked domains confirm a structured holding with multiple subsidiaries. The company appears medium-sized with a focused market position in Latvia. The lack of detailed financial or registration data limits deeper business intelligence insights.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS, which is a fundamental security measure. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and others reduces its defense-in-depth posture. No forms or input fields were detected, minimizing attack surface from injection or data leakage. Privacy compliance is partial, with a privacy policy present but no cookie consent mechanism or GDPR explicit indicators. Incident response and security policies are not published, and no security contact emails are available. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be significantly improved by implementing recommended headers, privacy controls, and transparency measures.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  2. Add a cookie policy and consent mechanism to comply with GDPR and enhance user privacy.
  3. Publish incident response and security policies with clear contact channels for reporting security issues.
  4. Include explicit company contact information such as emails and phone numbers for transparency and trust.
  5. Conduct a WHOIS domain registration review once query limits reset to verify domain legitimacy and update website accordingly.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Riga Port City
Description
Riga Port City is a holding company developing the former Riga export port area in Andrejsala and Andrejosta. Its goal is to transform this previously inaccessible central Riga district into a vibrant, attractive city area for residents and visitors, fostering economic growth and becoming a new heart of Riga.
Key services
Real estate development, Property management, Urban regeneration
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Fonts, Swiper.js
Frameworks
Nuxt.js
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced

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 fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenge.
  2. WHOIS data unavailable due to query limit error; no registrar or domain age info extracted.
  3. Privacy policy is present but cookie policy and terms of service are missing.
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found on the main page.
  5. Social media links to Facebook, Instagram, and LinkedIn are present and appear legitimate.
  6. Website uses HTTPS with no visible security issues.
  7. No forms detected on the main page; no data collection fields found.
  8. Technical stack includes Nuxt.js and Swiper.js with Google Fonts.
  9. Content is business-focused, safe, and relevant to real estate and transportation sectors.
  10. No advertising or tracking scripts detected in the provided HTML.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using Nuxt.js, a modern Vue.js framework, and uses Swiper.js for carousel functionality. Google Fonts are used for typography. The site is served over HTTPS, indicating a secure transport layer. Performance appears moderate with large images used in carousels, which may impact load times. Mobile optimization is good with responsive design elements. Accessibility features are basic, with no explicit ARIA roles or landmarks detected in the provided HTML. SEO optimization is basic, with meta description and keywords tags present but empty. No analytics or tracking scripts were detected in the HTML content provided, indicating minimal user tracking.
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 rigaportcity.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 rigaportcity.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.