Skip to main content

Security report for sdcreate.lv

Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website sdcreate.lv currently serves as a security CAPTCHA challenge page powered by BitNinja, designed to block and validate visitors suspected of violating server security rules or automated bot activity. The page requires users to complete a Google reCAPTCHA v2 challenge to be removed from BitNinja's greylist and gain access. There is no business or marketing content visible, and the site primarily functions as a security gatekeeper rather than a traditional website. Technically, the site uses Joomla! 1.5 CMS as indicated by meta tags, along with embedded Google Analytics and Tag Manager scripts for tracking. The page is minimalistic, with basic styling and multi-language support for CAPTCHA instructions. However, no privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies are present, and WHOIS data is unavailable due to query limits, limiting transparency. From a security perspective, the site employs Google reCAPTCHA to mitigate automated abuse and IP greylisting via BitNinja. However, no security headers or HTTPS status information were found in the provided data, indicating potential gaps in security best practices. The lack of privacy and cookie policies also suggests compliance deficiencies. Overall, the site is currently inaccessible without CAPTCHA completion, limiting content and business analysis. The security posture is moderate due to bot mitigation but lacks comprehensive security controls and transparency. Strategic recommendations include implementing HTTPS, adding security headers, publishing privacy and cookie policies, and improving WHOIS data availability to enhance trust and compliance.

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

9 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

  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 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';…

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

Keep watching sdcreate.lv

This scan found 24 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
20
Email security
85
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
10
Average
60

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

Given the content is a BitNinja security CAPTCHA page, there is no direct business information or market positioning available. The domain sdcreate.lv appears to be protected by BitNinja services, indicating prior security concerns or automated abuse mitigation needs. No company contact details, business descriptions, or revenue models are present. The target audience is limited to visitors blocked by BitNinja security. The presence of Joomla! 1.5 meta tags suggests the underlying site may be older or legacy, but no further business intelligence can be derived from the current content.

Security posture

The security posture is characterized by the use of BitNinja's greylist and Google reCAPTCHA v2 to prevent automated malicious access. This indicates a proactive approach to bot mitigation and IP reputation management. However, the absence of visible security headers (e.g., CSP, HSTS), no explicit HTTPS confirmation, and lack of privacy or cookie policies highlight gaps in comprehensive security and compliance. The WHOIS data is unavailable due to query limits, reducing transparency. Incident response and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are not evident. Overall, the site demonstrates basic security controls focused on access control but lacks broader security maturity and compliance features.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce HTTPS with strong TLS configuration to secure all communications.
  2. Add essential security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Publish clear and comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  4. Ensure WHOIS data is accessible and accurate to enhance domain transparency and legitimacy.
  5. Consider upgrading CMS and underlying platform to supported versions to reduce technical debt and security risks.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

BitNinja detected. Page is a security CAPTCHA challenge by BitNinja indicating visitor IP is greylisted and blocked until CAPTCHA validation. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Description
This page is a security CAPTCHA challenge page presented by BitNinja to validate visitors and prevent automated malicious access.
Key services
IP greylist management, CAPTCHA validation
Content quality
basic
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS Reset, JavaScript, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Google reCAPTCHA v2
Frameworks
Joomla! 1.5, WordPress 2.5 (meta tags only)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
30/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA for bot mitigation
  • IP greylist management via BitNinja

Analytics and tracking

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

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
basic
User experience
basic
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
basic
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website content is a security CAPTCHA challenge page by BitNinja.
  2. No business or marketing content present.
  3. No contact information or policies found.
  4. WHOIS data unavailable due to query limit error.
  5. Uses Google reCAPTCHA v2 for bot mitigation.
  6. Includes multiple language translations for CAPTCHA instructions.
  7. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies detected.
  8. No visible security headers or HTTPS status in provided data.
  9. External scripts include Google Analytics and Tag Manager.
  10. Page is minimal and blocks access until CAPTCHA solved.
Technical notes

Notes

The site uses Joomla! 1.5 CMS as indicated by meta tags, which is an outdated version and may pose security risks. WordPress 2.5 is also mentioned in meta tags but likely residual or inaccurate. The page includes Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager scripts for tracking, and Google reCAPTCHA v2 for bot mitigation. The HTML uses a CSS reset and basic styling with responsive considerations. The site is minimalistic, serving primarily as a CAPTCHA challenge page. No hosting provider or SSL certificate details are visible in the provided data. Performance is moderate given the minimal content, but mobile optimization and accessibility are basic. SEO optimization is poor due to lack of meta descriptions and indexing directives (robots meta tag is noindex, nofollow). Overall, the technical implementation is functional for its purpose but outdated and limited in scope.
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 sdcreate.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 sdcreate.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.