Skip to main content

Security report for ruby-digital.agency

Ruby Digital Marketing Agency · Technology · Latvia

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

Security score

50/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Ruby Digital Marketing Agency is a small, Russian-language focused digital marketing service provider founded in 2022. The company offers website creation, Google and Yandex advertising, social media management, SEO optimization, and additional marketing services. Their business model centers on becoming an integral part of their clients' teams, emphasizing quality and profitability. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with Elementor, hosted on Beget servers, and uses modern web technologies. The site is moderately optimized for performance and mobile devices but lacks advanced accessibility features. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled but lacks DNSSEC and important security headers. Privacy compliance is weak due to missing privacy and cookie policies. The domain registration is consistent with the business claims, enhancing trustworthiness. Tracking tools like Google Analytics and Facebook Pixel are used, indicating moderate user tracking. Overall, the website is professional and functional but requires improvements in privacy compliance and security hardening.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 100 · Medium
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. 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. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

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

Keep watching ruby-digital.agency

This scan found 25 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
72
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
50
Average
50

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 agency targets Russian-speaking businesses seeking digital marketing solutions, positioning itself as a quality-focused partner. Their competitive advantage lies in personalized service and integration with client teams. Revenue likely derives from service contracts in website development, advertising campaigns, and social media management. The company maintains active social media presence on WhatsApp and Telegram, facilitating client communication. Growth indicators include recent domain registration and active marketing efforts. No parent or subsidiary companies are identified, indicating an independent small business. Strategic observations suggest focusing on compliance and security enhancements to build greater client trust and expand market reach.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and no visible sensitive data exposure. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options exposes the site to potential DNS spoofing and clickjacking risks. Lack of published privacy and cookie policies indicates compliance gaps with GDPR and related regulations. No incident response contacts or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are present, limiting readiness for security events. Tracking scripts from Google and Facebook introduce moderate user tracking, which should be transparently disclosed. Overall, the security posture is functional but requires enhancements in DNS security, HTTP headers, and privacy documentation to meet best practices.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to protect against DNS spoofing and improve domain security.
  2. Implement essential security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, and Referrer-Policy.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and enhance user trust.
  4. Add a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  5. Regularly audit and update WordPress plugins and themes to mitigate vulnerabilities and maintain security posture.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Ruby Digital Marketing Agency
Description
Digital marketing agency focused on website creation, advertising in Google and Yandex, social media management, SEO optimization, and additional marketing services. They emphasize quality, client focus, and integration as part of the client's team.
Key services
Website creation, Google and Yandex advertising, Social media management and advertising, SEO optimization, Additional marketing services
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Elementor, PHP, JavaScript, CSS
Frameworks
Elementor
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
65/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of reputable hosting provider

Analytics and tracking

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

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Ads, Facebook Ads
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel
Marketing tools
Facebook Pixel
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is in Russian language targeting Russian-speaking clients.
  2. No privacy or cookie policies found, which is a compliance gap.
  3. Contact information includes phone and social media but no email found.
  4. Uses WordPress with Elementor, common for small agencies.
  5. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure found.
  6. No DNSSEC enabled, which is a minor security weakness.
  7. Uses Facebook Pixel and Google Analytics for tracking.
  8. No signs of adult or questionable content.
  9. Domain registration is recent but consistent with business claims.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS using the Elementor page builder, leveraging PHP, JavaScript, and CSS technologies. Hosting is provided by Beget, as indicated by the nameservers. The site uses Google Tag Manager and Facebook Pixel for analytics and marketing tracking. Performance is moderate with caching and minified CSS/JS assets observed. Mobile optimization is good with responsive design elements. Accessibility features are basic, with some focus styles and semantic HTML elements present. SEO optimization is basic, with meta tags and structured navigation but no advanced schema.org structured data detected. Technical risks include lack of DNSSEC and missing security headers, which could be addressed to improve resilience. Overall, the technical infrastructure is standard for a small digital agency but has room for modernization and security improvements.
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 ruby-digital.agency. 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 ruby-digital.agency.

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.