Skip to main content

Security report for stylisticnails.lv

Other · N/a

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 stylisticnails.lv is currently inaccessible as it is protected by a BitNinja Web Application Firewall (WAF) that presents a CAPTCHA challenge to visitors. This security measure blocks automated or suspicious traffic to prevent cyber attacks. Due to this, the actual business content of the site is not accessible for analysis. The visible page is a security validation page with no business or contact information, privacy policies, or terms of service. The site references outdated CMS versions such as Joomla 1.5 and WordPress 2.5, which may indicate legacy infrastructure or misconfiguration. The presence of Google Analytics and Tag Manager scripts indicates some level of visitor tracking, but no cookie or privacy consent mechanisms are evident. WHOIS data could not be retrieved due to query limits, preventing verification of domain registration details. Overall, the site’s security posture is limited to the WAF protection, with no visible security headers or HTTPS enforcement in the HTML content. The lack of accessible business information and privacy compliance reduces trust and credibility.

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 stylisticnails.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. 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

Due to the WAF blocking, no direct business information is available from the website content. The domain stylisticnails.lv suggests a business related to nail styling or beauty services, but no explicit company name, description, or contact details are present. The outdated CMS references may indicate a legacy or poorly maintained website. No partner or subsidiary domains were identified. The business model, market position, and revenue streams cannot be determined from the available data. The site appears to target general internet users but currently serves only as a security checkpoint. No growth indicators or partnership ecosystem details are visible.

Security posture

The website employs BitNinja WAF for bot mitigation and security, which is a strong protective measure against automated attacks. Google reCAPTCHA v2 is used to validate human visitors. However, no security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, or X-Content-Type-Options were detected in the HTML content. The site references outdated CMS versions, which may expose it to vulnerabilities if not properly patched. There is no visible HTTPS enforcement or HSTS policy in the HTML content, though HTTPS may be enforced at the server level (not verifiable here). No privacy or cookie policies are present, indicating compliance gaps with GDPR and other regulations. Incident response and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are not found. Overall, the security posture relies heavily on the WAF, with limited visible best practices.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce HTTPS with HSTS to secure all communications.
  2. Add essential security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Update CMS platforms to supported versions to mitigate known vulnerabilities.
  4. Publish clear privacy and cookie policies with GDPR compliance and consent mechanisms.
  5. Provide accessible contact information and incident response channels to improve trust and compliance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

BitNinja detected. Page is a security challenge by BitNinja WAF, blocking access until CAPTCHA is solved. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Stack
Joomla 1.5, WordPress 2.5, Drupal, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, reCAPTCHA v2
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
40/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA v2 for bot mitigation

Analytics and tracking

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

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website is currently blocked by BitNinja WAF with CAPTCHA challenge.
  2. No actual business content is accessible on the page.
  3. No contact information, privacy policy, or terms of service found.
  4. CMS versions indicated are very outdated (Joomla 1.5, WordPress 2.5).
  5. Use of Google Analytics and Tag Manager present.
  6. No WHOIS data available due to query limit error.
  7. No security headers detected in HTML content.
  8. No SSL/TLS configuration details visible from HTML content.
  9. Page is primarily a security validation page, not a business website front page.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses legacy CMS platforms including Joomla 1.5, WordPress 2.5, and Drupal as indicated by meta tags, which are outdated and potentially insecure. The site includes Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager scripts for visitor tracking. The presence of BitNinja WAF and Google reCAPTCHA v2 indicates some security infrastructure. The HTML content is minimal and primarily serves as a CAPTCHA challenge page. Performance is moderate but limited by the blocking mechanism. Mobile optimization and accessibility are basic, with no advanced features detected. SEO optimization is poor due to lack of meaningful content and meta tags. The site lacks modern frameworks or platforms and shows signs of technical debt and legacy infrastructure.
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 stylisticnails.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 stylisticnails.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.