Skip to main content

Security report for wearelit.co

LIT · Media · India

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

65/100

Risk levelMedium

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

LIT is an influencer management agency based in India, focused on connecting creators with top brands to foster an innovative creator community. The website positions itself as a professional and modern platform for influencer marketing and brand collaborations. The business targets creators and brands, operating primarily in the media sector with a small company size profile. Technically, the website uses modern frontend technologies including Bootstrap, jQuery, OwlCarousel, Font Awesome, and Google Analytics, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. The site is mobile optimized and provides a good user experience with clear navigation and professional design. Security posture is moderate; HTTPS is implied but no explicit security headers or advanced security policies are detected. Privacy compliance is lacking as no privacy or cookie policies are found, which is a notable gap. The WHOIS data is fully redacted, typical for privacy protection, and no suspicious patterns are detected, supporting legitimacy. Overall, the website is professional and functional but would benefit from enhanced privacy and security measures.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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

8 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"

    • 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';…

  2. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

    • High

      No Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

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

Keep watching wearelit.co

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
77
Security headers
15
Email security
85
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
65

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

LIT operates in the influencer marketing space, leveraging a business model that connects creators and brands for collaborations. The company appears to be a small-sized entity focused on the Indian market. Its competitive advantage lies in its curated creator community and brand partnerships. Revenue streams likely include influencer campaign management fees and brand marketing services. The website's social media presence on Instagram and LinkedIn supports its market positioning and outreach efforts. There is no evidence of parent or subsidiary companies. The company maintains a professional online presence but lacks visible certifications or compliance documentation, which could be areas for growth. Strategic partnerships are not explicitly listed but social media links suggest active engagement with the influencer ecosystem.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic to moderate security posture. HTTPS is used, ensuring encrypted communications. However, no security headers such as Content Security Policy, X-Frame-Options, or HSTS are detected, which are important for mitigating common web attacks. There are no visible forms collecting sensitive data, reducing immediate risk exposure. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates compliance gaps with GDPR and other data protection regulations. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, limiting transparency. The use of third-party scripts like Google Analytics introduces moderate tracking but no evident vulnerabilities. Overall, the security maturity is adequate for a small media business but requires improvements to meet best practices and regulatory requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Add security headers such as Content Security Policy, X-Frame-Options, and HSTS to enhance protection against common web vulnerabilities.
  3. Create a vulnerability disclosure or security.txt page to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party libraries and scripts to mitigate risks from vulnerable dependencies.
  5. Consider adding contact phone numbers and more detailed business information to improve credibility and user confidence.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
LIT
Description
At LIT, you can connect with talented creators, top brands, and unlock limitless possibilities. Join us today and be a part of the innovative creator community.
Key services
Influencer management, Brand collaborations, Creator community engagement
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap 5.2.0-beta1, jQuery 2.1.3, OwlCarousel 2.3.4, Font Awesome 6.1.1, Google Fonts (Poppins, Montserrat), Google Analytics (gtag.js)
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
65/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS implied by external scripts loaded over HTTPS
  • No visible forms collecting sensitive data

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenge
  2. WHOIS data is fully redacted, indicating privacy protection
  3. No privacy or cookie policy found, which is a compliance gap
  4. Contact information is limited to email and physical address, no phone number found
  5. No forms present on homepage; minimal data collection observed
  6. Social media presence on Instagram and LinkedIn supports legitimacy
  7. Use of modern frontend technologies and analytics tools
  8. No visible security headers or advanced security policies detected
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using a modern frontend stack including Bootstrap 5, jQuery, OwlCarousel, and Font Awesome, ensuring responsive design and interactive elements. Google Fonts and Google Analytics are integrated for typography and analytics respectively. The site loads external resources over HTTPS, supporting secure data transmission. Performance is moderate, with no major issues detected but potential for optimization exists. Accessibility features are basic, with scope for improvement to meet WCAG standards. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and structured navigation. No CMS is detected, suggesting a custom or static site architecture. Hosting provider details are not discernible from the data. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid for a small business website but could benefit from enhanced security and compliance features.
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 wearelit.co. 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 wearelit.co.

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.