Skip to main content

Security report for transports.lv

TransportPartners · Transportation · Latvia

High risk. 12 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Network security and 2 other checks.

Security score

40/100

Risk levelHigh

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

TransportPartners is a transportation-focused company based in Latvia, offering services including transportation, vehicle sales, data management, and recruitment. The website is built using modern Blazor technology with UI frameworks such as AntDesign Blazor, MudBlazor, and DevExpress Blazor, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. The site provides clear navigation and basic content relevant to its business domain but lacks comprehensive privacy and cookie policies, which are critical for compliance and user trust. Security posture appears weak due to missing security headers and unknown SSL configuration, and no WHOIS data was available to verify domain legitimacy. Overall, the website is functional but requires improvements in security, privacy compliance, and trust signals to enhance its risk profile and user confidence.

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

12 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. 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: SMB

      Port 445 (SMB) is publicly accessible - SMB - Windows file sharing, high risk

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to SMB 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
    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: PostgreSQL

      Port 5432 (PostgreSQL) is publicly accessible - PostgreSQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to PostgreSQL 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 transports.lv

This scan found 27 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
72
Security headers
20
Email security
70
DNS health
70
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
10
Average
40

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention transports.lv, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
4
Employees
0
Customers
4
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
75%

1 subdomain affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for transports.lv.

Select it in the checkout above.

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

The company targets businesses and individuals in Latvia seeking transportation services and vehicle sales. Its business model includes service provision and sales, supplemented by data management and recruitment offerings. The website's market position appears regional with moderate brand consistency. The absence of detailed business registration or certification information limits deeper business intelligence insights. No partner or subsidiary domains were identified, and no analytics or marketing tools were detected, suggesting a straightforward operational model without extensive digital marketing or tracking.

Security posture

The current security maturity level is low, with no detected security headers, unclear SSL/TLS status, and no visible vulnerability disclosures or incident response contacts. The lack of privacy and cookie policies indicates compliance gaps, particularly with GDPR. No forms or input fields were detected in the provided content, reducing attack surface but also limiting user interaction. The absence of WHOIS data restricts trust verification. Recommendations include implementing HTTPS with strong SSL, adding security headers, publishing privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms, and establishing vulnerability disclosure and incident response processes.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate and verify configuration.
  2. Add essential security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with GDPR compliance and consent mechanisms.
  4. Establish a vulnerability disclosure policy and incident response contact information.
  5. Enhance trust signals by adding business registration details, certifications, and verified contact emails.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
TransportPartners
Description
TransportPartners appears to be a company involved in transportation services, vehicle sales, data management, and recruitment (vacancies). The website offers sections such as About Us, Services, Vehicles for Sale, Data Manager, Vacancy, and Contacts.
Key services
Transportation services, Vehicle sales, Data management, Recruitment
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
Blazor, AntDesign Blazor, MudBlazor, DevExpress Blazor, Bootstrap
Frameworks
Blazor
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is built using Blazor framework with multiple UI component libraries.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the site.
  3. Contact information limited to a phone number displayed in the navigation bar.
  4. No email addresses or social media links detected in the provided HTML content.
  5. No forms detected in the truncated HTML content provided.
  6. No security headers or SSL configuration details available from the data.
  7. No analytics or tracking scripts detected.
  8. Website content is in English with some Latvian references (domain and phone country code).
  9. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected; content is accessible.
  10. WHOIS lookup failed due to daily query limit; no registrar or domain registration data available.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses Blazor framework with UI libraries including AntDesign Blazor, MudBlazor, and DevExpress Blazor, combined with Bootstrap for styling. The site loads external fonts from Google Fonts and includes custom scripts. Performance is moderate with basic mobile optimization and accessibility features. SEO optimization is basic with standard meta tags but no advanced structured data or Open Graph tags detected. Hosting provider and CMS are not identifiable from the provided data. The site structure is clear with a horizontal menu and multiple service sections. Technical debt is moderate due to missing security and privacy features, and modernization opportunities exist in enhancing compliance and security posture.
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 transports.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 transports.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.