Skip to main content

Security report for tadeo.lv

Tadeo · Other · Latvia

High risk. 9 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Network security and 1 other check.

Security score

46/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Tadeo.lv is a Latvian legal services website representing a small legal office offering juridical services to individuals and companies. The website is built on WordPress using the OnePress theme and several common plugins including Contact Form 7 and Easy Fancybox. It supports multilingual content in Latvian, English, and Russian. The site presents a professional but basic online presence with limited content and no visible privacy or cookie policies. Technical infrastructure is standard for a small business WordPress site, with moderate performance and good mobile optimization. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled but lacks important HTTP security headers and formal security policies. No WHOIS data was available due to query limits, but no suspicious indicators were found in the site content. Overall, the site is legitimate but could improve transparency 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. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

  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"

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

Keep watching tadeo.lv

This scan found 23 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
85
Security headers
30
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
0
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 · found on this site
  • 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 business operates in the legal services sector targeting Latvian individuals and companies. It positions itself as a local legal office with a clear focus on juridical consultancy. The business model is service-based, relying on client engagements for legal advice. The website lacks detailed business information such as company registration or VAT numbers, which limits trust signals. There is no evidence of partnerships or subsidiaries. The multilingual approach suggests an intent to serve a broader regional audience. The site’s content and structure indicate a small-sized enterprise with basic digital marketing and limited online engagement tools.

Security posture

The website uses HTTPS, which is a fundamental security requirement. However, it lacks visible HTTP security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options, which are important for mitigating common web attacks. No privacy or cookie policies were found, indicating potential GDPR compliance gaps. There is no security.txt or vulnerability disclosure policy, limiting incident response transparency. The absence of contact emails and phone numbers on the site reduces the ability for users or security researchers to report issues. The WordPress version and plugins appear somewhat outdated, which could pose security risks if not regularly updated. Overall, the security posture is moderate but requires improvements to meet best practices and regulatory requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR.
  2. Add HTTP security headers including CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection.
  3. Provide clear contact information including company emails and phone numbers for support and incident reporting.
  4. Establish a security.txt file or vulnerability disclosure policy to facilitate responsible vulnerability reporting.
  5. Regularly update WordPress core, themes, and plugins to latest secure versions.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Tadeo
Description
Tadeo is a legal office providing juridical services. The website states: 'Tu zini, ko gribi. Mēs zinām, kā palīdzēt to sasniegt.' (You know what you want. We know how to help you achieve it.)
Key services
Legal services for private persons, Legal services for companies
Content quality
basic
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 5.7.12, jQuery 3.5.1, Bootstrap 3/4 (based on bootstrap.min.js), Font Awesome 4.7.0, Google Fonts (Raleway, Open Sans), Contact Form 7 plugin, Easy Fancybox plugin, OnePress theme 2.2.4, qTranslate-X 3.4.6.8
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
55/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Use of deferred loading for emoji script
  • No inline sensitive data found

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a WordPress-based legal services site in Latvian language
  2. No WHOIS data available due to query limit exceeded
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service pages detected
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the HTML content
  5. No social media links for company profiles detected
  6. Site uses multilingual plugin qTranslate-X with Latvian, English, Russian
  7. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure policy found
  8. No explicit GDPR compliance indicators
  9. Site uses HTTPS but lacks visible security headers
  10. No advertising or tracking scripts detected beyond basic plugins
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 5.7.12 with a popular OnePress theme and uses common plugins such as Contact Form 7 and Easy Fancybox. It loads Google Fonts and Font Awesome for styling and icons. The site uses jQuery 3.5.1 and Bootstrap for responsive design. The multilingual plugin qTranslate-X enables content in Latvian, English, and Russian. Performance is moderate with deferred script loading for emojis. The site is mobile optimized and has basic accessibility features. However, there is no evidence of advanced SEO optimization or performance enhancements like caching or CDN usage. Hosting provider details are not discernible from the HTML content. Overall, the technical stack is typical for a small business WordPress site but could benefit from modernization and security hardening.
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 tadeo.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 tadeo.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.