Skip to main content

Security report for rigawaterfront.com

Riga Waterfront · Real Estate · Latvia

Low risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

76/100

Risk levelLow

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

Riga Waterfront is a luxury real estate development project based in Riga, Latvia, offering premium waterfront apartments positioned as the new center of Europe. The website presents a professional and consistent brand image targeting affluent buyers and investors interested in high-end property. The business model focuses on real estate sales and property development with a clear emphasis on luxury and exclusivity. Technically, the website is built on WordPress using Elementor, supported by Cloudflare DNS services, and implements modern web technologies including JavaScript and jQuery. The site is mobile-optimized and SEO-friendly, with good performance and accessibility features. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enforced and clientTransferProhibited domain status, though DNSSEC is not enabled and some security headers are missing. Privacy compliance is well addressed with a cookie consent mechanism and a cookie policy page, though a dedicated privacy policy page is less prominent. Contact information is clearly provided via structured data and contact forms, enhancing business credibility. Overall, the website is safe, professional, and trustworthy with no signs of adult or questionable content.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 100 · Low
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. 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';…

  2. 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.

    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching rigawaterfront.com

This scan found 17 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
75
Security headers
15
Email security
98
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
Average
76

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 sector, specifically luxury residential development in Riga, Latvia. The market positioning is upscale, targeting buyers seeking premium waterfront living. The business leverages digital marketing tools such as Google Ads and Crazy Egg for analytics and retargeting. Social media presence across major platforms supports brand awareness and customer engagement. The domain registration is recent but consistent with the launch of a new development project. No suspicious patterns or privacy protection obfuscation is present, supporting legitimacy. The business model is straightforward, focusing on property sales with potential for growth as the development progresses. No parent or subsidiary companies are identified, indicating a focused standalone project.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses Cloudflare DNS, which provides a baseline of security. The domain status clientTransferProhibited protects against unauthorized transfers. However, DNSSEC is not enabled, which is a recommended best practice for DNS security. The site lacks explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options, which could improve protection against common web attacks. The cookie consent mechanism is implemented with blocking mode, indicating GDPR compliance efforts. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is provided, which is a gap in transparency. Overall, the security posture is moderate with room for improvement in headers and DNS security.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement and verify security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Publish a dedicated privacy policy page with comprehensive data protection details.
  4. Add a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to improve transparency and incident response readiness.
  5. Regularly audit and update all plugins and scripts to mitigate vulnerabilities and maintain security hygiene.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Riga Waterfront
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Riga Waterfront
Description
Experience the ultimate in luxury living with waterfront apartments in Riga Waterfront Latvia, the New Center of Europe. Riverfront living experience.
Key services
Luxury waterfront apartments, Real estate sales, Property development
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Elementor, PHP, JavaScript, jQuery, Cloudflare DNS
Frameworks
Elementor
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • ClientTransferProhibited domain status
  • Cookie consent with blocking mode enabled

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager), Crazy Egg
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Ads, Crazy Egg
Tracking pixels
Crazy Egg
Marketing tools
Cookiebot, Google Analytics (implied by GTM)
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed with clear branding and consistent messaging.
  2. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented with blocking mode, indicating GDPR compliance efforts.
  3. No explicit privacy policy page found but cookie policy is present and linked.
  4. Contact information is available via JSON-LD and contact forms.
  5. No terms of service or security policy pages detected.
  6. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found.
  7. Website uses modern WordPress CMS with Elementor builder and Cloudflare DNS.
  8. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected; site fully accessible.
  9. No adult or questionable content detected; content is safe for general audiences.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress CMS platform using the Elementor page builder, which facilitates responsive and visually appealing design. It uses common web technologies such as JavaScript and jQuery, and integrates third-party services like Cookiebot for consent management and Google Tag Manager for analytics. Hosting and DNS are managed via Cloudflare, providing performance and security benefits. The site demonstrates good SEO practices with proper meta tags and structured data (JSON-LD) for enhanced search engine visibility. Performance is moderate, with some optimization possible. Accessibility is basic but functional. The technical stack is standard for real estate marketing sites, with opportunities to improve security headers and DNS configuration for better resilience.
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 rigawaterfront.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 rigawaterfront.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.