Skip to main content

Security report for tuv.lv

Other · Latvia

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

72/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website www.tuv.lv represents a Latvian business likely engaged in certification, testing, and inspection services. The site is built on WordPress and uses popular plugins such as Slider Revolution and Visual Composer, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. The presence of a cookie consent mechanism shows some attention to privacy compliance, although no explicit privacy or terms of service pages were detected in the analyzed content. Security posture appears basic with no advanced security headers detected and unknown SSL configuration. The absence of WHOIS data limits full verification of domain legitimacy. Overall, the site is functional but could benefit from enhanced transparency and security measures.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
73/ 100 · Medium
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

4 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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"

  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  3. 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.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

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

Keep watching tuv.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
77
Security headers
30
Email security
65
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
73
Average
72

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 business appears to be a service provider in the certification and testing sector, targeting organizations requiring compliance and quality assurance services. The market positioning is likely regional or national within Latvia. The business model is service-oriented, with key offerings around certification and inspection. The website content is minimal but professional, lacking detailed business information or contact details. No partnerships or subsidiaries were identified from the content. The company likely serves medium-sized enterprises or larger organizations requiring certification services.

Security posture

Security maturity is basic. The website uses HTTPS (implied by the URL) but lacks visible security headers in the provided data. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected, but the absence of security policies and incident response contacts is a gap. The cookie consent mechanism is a positive privacy feature. The lack of WHOIS data and contact information reduces trust and complicates incident response. Compliance with GDPR is uncertain due to missing privacy policy. Overall, the security posture is functional but needs improvement in transparency and technical controls.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service to improve transparency and compliance.
  2. Implement and verify security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Add clear and verified contact information including emails and phone numbers for customer support and incident response.
  4. Conduct regular vulnerability assessments and update WordPress plugins and themes to mitigate risks.
  5. Consider publishing a security or incident response policy and appoint a data protection officer to enhance trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
The website appears to be for a Latvian entity, likely related to certification, testing, or inspection services given the domain and branding (TUV). The content is in Latvian with an English alternate link. The business model likely involves providing certification and testing services.
Key services
Certification, Testing, Inspection
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
WordPress, PHP, JavaScript, jQuery, Slider Revolution, Visual Composer, Google Fonts
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
40/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
CookieYes
Marketing tools
CookieYes
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible and not blocked by WAF or security mechanisms.
  2. WHOIS data unavailable due to query limit error.
  3. Website uses WordPress CMS with common plugins like Slider Revolution and Visual Composer.
  4. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented via CookieYes.
  5. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages detected in the provided content.
  6. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses found in the analyzed content.
  7. No social media links explicitly found except Facebook domain referenced in scripts.
  8. No security headers detected in the provided data; SSL status unknown.
  9. Content is professional but minimal; mostly styling and scripts with little visible textual content in the snippet.
  10. No adult or questionable content detected; content is safe for general audiences.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with common plugins for visual editing and sliders, indicating a standard modern web infrastructure. The use of Google Fonts and external cookie consent scripts is noted. Performance appears moderate with caching and minified CSS/JS files. Mobile optimization is good based on viewport meta tags and responsive styles. Accessibility and SEO are basic but could be improved with more semantic markup and metadata. Hosting provider and SSL configuration details are not available from the provided data. Overall, the technical implementation is standard but could benefit from modernization and enhanced security configurations.
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 tuv.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 tuv.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.