Skip to main content

Security report for senvietas.lv

Other · Latvia

High risk. 9 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

46/100

Risk levelHigh

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

The website www.senvietas.lv serves as an informational platform dedicated to ancient sacral sites in Latvia, promoting cultural heritage and tourism. It targets a general audience interested in Latvian history and sacred places, offering detailed project information, tourism routes, galleries, and 3D models. The site is built on WordPress and integrates modern web technologies such as OpenLayers for map visualization and Slider Revolution for interactive content. Social media integration and Google Analytics indicate a moderate level of digital maturity. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and avoids exposing sensitive data, but lacks advanced security headers and explicit privacy or cookie policies, which are important for compliance and user trust. The absence of WHOIS data limits domain legitimacy verification, but the website content and external references suggest a legitimate cultural heritage project. Overall, the site is functional and professionally presented but could improve privacy compliance and security hardening. Strategically, the site should prioritize implementing comprehensive privacy and cookie policies, enhance security headers, and maintain up-to-date software to mitigate vulnerabilities. These steps will improve user trust, regulatory compliance, and overall security posture.

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

  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.

    • 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

  3. 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 senvietas.lv

This scan found 22 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
0
Security headers
20
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
10
Average
46

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 website operates in the niche cultural heritage sector, focusing on Latvian ancient sacred sites. It leverages partnerships with related cultural organizations such as www.latvijas-pilskalni.lv and hillforts.eu, enhancing its credibility and reach. The business model is informational and promotional, likely supported by public or cultural grants rather than direct revenue streams. The multilingual approach broadens its audience across Latvia, Estonia, Sweden, and English-speaking visitors. The site’s content and structure indicate a small-sized operation with a focus on educational and tourism-related services. Growth potential lies in expanding digital content, interactive maps, and partnerships with tourism agencies.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic to moderate security posture with HTTPS enabled and no visible sensitive data leaks. However, it lacks important security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and HSTS, which are critical for protecting against common web attacks. The absence of a security.txt file or vulnerability disclosure policy indicates limited incident response readiness. Forms appear standard without advanced anti-bot or input validation mechanisms visible in the HTML. Regular updates and security hardening are recommended to maintain and improve security maturity.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance statements.
  2. Add security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Establish a security.txt file and vulnerability disclosure policy to improve incident response and transparency.
  4. Regularly update WordPress core, themes, and plugins to mitigate known vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance user trust by providing clear business information and contact details, including physical address and phone numbers if applicable.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Senās kulta vietas / Ancient sacral sites
Key services
Information about ancient sacred sites, Project details about cultural heritage, Tourism routes and maps, Gallery and 3D models
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.7.2, jQuery 3.7.1, OpenLayers (OpenStreetMap integration), Slider Revolution, WP Dark Mode plugin, Custom Related Posts plugin, Ivory Search plugin
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of secure cookies and nonce in scripts

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Marketing tools
Google Site Kit
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a WordPress-based cultural heritage informational site focused on Latvian ancient sacred sites.
  2. Content is multilingual with Latvian as primary language and alternate versions in English, Estonian, and Swedish.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies explicitly found on the homepage or main menu.
  4. Contact information includes a general email link (info@latvijas-pilskalni.lv) and a search form; no explicit phone numbers or physical addresses found.
  5. Social media presence is active with official Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Instagram accounts linked.
  6. Uses Google Analytics via Site Kit plugin for traffic analysis.
  7. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure policy detected.
  8. No explicit security or incident response policies found.
  9. No WHOIS data available due to query limit; domain legitimacy inferred from website content and external references.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 6.7.2 with a modern tech stack including jQuery 3.7.1 and OpenLayers for map integration. It uses several plugins such as Slider Revolution, WP Dark Mode, and Ivory Search, indicating a feature-rich but potentially complex environment. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and basic accessibility features. SEO is supported by proper meta tags including Open Graph and Twitter Cards. Hosting provider details are not disclosed. Technical risks include potential plugin vulnerabilities and lack of advanced security headers. Opportunities exist to improve performance and accessibility further.
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 senvietas.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 senvietas.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.