Skip to main content

Security report for verex.eu

Verex · Transportation · Latvia

High risk. 10 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

32/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Verex is a Latvian-based freight forwarding and logistics company specializing in railway cargo services, oversized cargo, liquid cargo, and dangerous goods transportation primarily in Riga ports. Established in 2008, it serves businesses requiring comprehensive freight solutions with a focus on reliability and safety. The website reflects a professional business presence with multilingual support and clear contact channels. Technically, the site is built on WordPress using Elementor and integrates Google Analytics with user consent mechanisms, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. Security posture is good with HTTPS and cookie consent but lacks explicit security policies and vulnerability disclosures. Overall, the site is trustworthy and well-positioned for its niche, though improvements in security transparency and compliance documentation are recommended.

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

  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 verex.eu

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
0
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
10
Average
32

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

Verex operates in the transportation sector with a focus on freight forwarding via rail and port logistics. Its competitive advantage lies in its established presence since 2008 and comprehensive service offerings including specialized cargo types. The business model is service-oriented targeting commercial clients needing cargo transport solutions. The company maintains a professional digital footprint with social media engagement and multilingual content, supporting regional market penetration. Growth indicators include diversified service lines and active project listings. Partnerships or subsidiaries are not explicitly identified. Strategic observations suggest focusing on enhancing compliance documentation and security transparency to strengthen market trust.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enforcement and a cookie consent mechanism aligned with GDPR principles. However, it lacks published security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure programs, which are critical for comprehensive security posture. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. The use of third-party plugins necessitates regular security audits to mitigate risks. The absence of security headers like Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options is a gap. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a small business but can be improved to meet higher compliance and trust standards.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a clear privacy policy and terms of service pages to enhance compliance and user trust.
  2. Implement and publish a security policy including incident response contact details.
  3. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to strengthen protection.
  4. Establish a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party plugins and scripts to prevent vulnerabilities.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Verex
Description
VEREX provides full railway freight forwarding services in Riga ports since 2008, including container shipments, wagon cargo, dangerous and oversized cargo transportation.
Key services
Railway freight forwarding, Oversized cargo transportation, Liquid cargo transportation, Dangerous goods transportation, Port cargo forwarding, Expedition services
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Elementor, Google Analytics, MonsterInsights, SitePress Multilingual CMS (WPML), Cookie Law Info plugin
Frameworks
Elementor
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of Google Analytics with opt-out mechanism

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Marketing tools
MonsterInsights
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is primarily in Latvian with multilingual support (English, Russian).
  3. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented with detailed preferences.
  4. Contact information is clearly presented including phone, email, address, and contact form.
  5. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages found.
  6. Use of modern WordPress plugins and Elementor builder.
  7. Social media presence on LinkedIn and Facebook with embedded posts.
  8. No visible security policy or incident response information.
  9. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found.
  10. Website uses HTTPS with good SSL configuration.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress with Elementor page builder, leveraging modern web technologies and plugins such as MonsterInsights for analytics and WPML for multilingual support. The site uses Google Analytics with an opt-out mechanism, indicating attention to privacy. Performance is moderate with standard SEO meta tags and responsive design. Accessibility features are basic but present. Hosting provider details are not explicit. The technical stack is typical for small to medium business websites, offering ease of content management but requiring vigilance on plugin security and updates to avoid technical debt and vulnerabilities.
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 verex.eu. 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 verex.eu.

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.