Skip to main content

Security report for ultima.lv

SIA Ultima · Transportation · Latvia

High risk. 10 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

45/100

Risk levelHigh

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

SIA Ultima is a Latvian company specializing in oversized and heavy cargo transportation services, including project cargo handling, special permit processing across Europe and neighboring countries, and freight forwarding. The company targets businesses requiring complex logistics solutions for heavy and oversized shipments. Their website presents a professional image with clear navigation, service descriptions, project galleries, and contact options, positioning them as a regional player in the transportation sector. Technically, the website employs a traditional tech stack with jQuery 1.8.3, Modernizr, Google reCAPTCHA, and responsive design elements. While the site is mobile-optimized and user-friendly, some technologies are outdated, and there is a lack of modern security headers. The site uses HTTPS and Google reCAPTCHA to protect forms, but no explicit privacy or cookie policies are present, indicating compliance gaps. From a security perspective, the site shows moderate maturity with basic protections but lacks advanced security headers and uses an outdated JavaScript library version, which could expose vulnerabilities. The absence of WHOIS data due to query limits restricts domain trust verification, though the website content and contact details appear legitimate. No signs of malicious or adult content were found. Overall, the website is functional and professional but would benefit from enhanced security measures, updated technologies, and improved privacy compliance to strengthen trust and reduce risk.

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

10 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. 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 ultima.lv

This scan found 25 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
75
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
10
Average
45

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

SIA Ultima operates in the transportation and logistics sector, focusing on heavy and oversized cargo shipments. Their business model revolves around providing comprehensive project cargo services, including permit acquisition and freight forwarding, targeting industrial clients in Latvia and neighboring countries. The company maintains an active online presence with project galleries and news updates, indicating ongoing operations and client engagement. Their competitive advantage lies in specialized services for complex cargo transport and regulatory navigation. However, limited digital marketing and absence of detailed corporate information online suggest a small to medium enterprise with regional focus. Partnerships or subsidiaries are not evident from the website content.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic security posture with HTTPS enabled and Google reCAPTCHA protecting the contact form, mitigating spam risks. However, the use of an outdated jQuery version (1.8.3) introduces potential vulnerabilities. No security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options were detected, which are important for preventing common web attacks. The lack of privacy and cookie policies indicates non-compliance with GDPR and related regulations. Incident response and vulnerability disclosure information are absent, suggesting limited security governance. Overall, the security maturity is moderate but requires improvements to meet best practices and regulatory requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to ensure GDPR compliance.
  2. Upgrade all JavaScript libraries, especially jQuery, to supported secure versions.
  3. Add essential security headers like Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Publish incident response and vulnerability disclosure information to improve transparency and trust.
  5. Conduct regular security audits and update SSL/TLS configurations to maintain strong encryption standards.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
SIA Ultima
Description
SIA Ultima offers a full range of services in project, oversized and heavy cargo transportation worldwide, including special permit processing and freight forwarding.
Key services
Lielgabarīta un smagsvara pārvadājumi, Speciālo atļauju noformēšana, Kravu ekspedīcija
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery 1.8.3, Modernizr 2.5.3, Google reCAPTCHA v2, ResponsiveSlides.js, FlexNav, FancyBox
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
55/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of HTTPS (implied by recaptcha and meta tags)
  • Google reCAPTCHA implemented on contact form

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and navigation
  2. No privacy or cookie policies found, indicating compliance gaps
  3. Contact form uses Google reCAPTCHA for spam protection
  4. Use of outdated JavaScript libraries may pose security risks
  5. No explicit security headers detected in HTML content
  6. WHOIS data unavailable due to query limit, limiting domain trust verification
  7. No signs of adult or questionable content
  8. Social media presence limited to Facebook link
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a classic front-end stack with jQuery 1.8.3, Modernizr 2.5.3, and Google reCAPTCHA v2 for form protection. Responsive design is implemented via CSS media queries and responsive grid systems. Navigation is enhanced with FlexNav and slideshows with ResponsiveSlides.js. FancyBox is used for image galleries. The site lacks a detected CMS, suggesting a custom or static site. Performance is moderate with asynchronous script loading. Mobile optimization is good, but accessibility features are basic. SEO optimization is minimal with standard meta tags but no structured data or Open Graph tags detected. Technical debt is indicated by outdated libraries and missing security headers, presenting modernization opportunities to improve security and performance.
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 ultima.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 ultima.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.