Skip to main content

Is difftravel.org a Scam? Security Check Results - difftravel.org Reviews

difftravel.org favicon

Is difftravel.org Safe? Security Analysis for Atpūta un cilvēki ar invaliditāti

Check if difftravel.org is a scam or legitimate. Free security scan and reviews.

TransportationLatviasmall
jQuery 2.2.4Fancybox 3BannerplayResponsiveVideosMozlive
Analyzed 7/30/2025Completed 11:15:31 PM
55
Security Score
MEDIUM RISK

AI Summary

Difftravel.org is a Latvian small business specializing in accessible tourism services tailored for people with hearing, vision, or mobility impairments. The website offers group excursions with adapted vehicles and customized travel routes emphasizing Latvian cultural experiences. The business operates in a niche market with a focus on inclusivity and accessibility. Technically, the site is built on the Mozello CMS platform, leveraging Amazon CloudFront CDN and common JavaScript libraries such as jQuery and Fancybox. The site is mobile-optimized and presents a professional design with clear navigation. Security posture is moderate; HTTPS is implied but lacks visible security headers and advanced protections on login forms. Privacy compliance is partial, with a privacy policy present but no cookie consent mechanism. WHOIS data is unavailable or malformed, limiting domain trust verification. Social media presence on Facebook and Instagram supports legitimacy. Overall, the site is functional and trustworthy for its niche but would benefit from enhanced security and privacy features.

Detected Technologies

jQuery 2.2.4Fancybox 3BannerplayResponsiveVideosMozlive

🧠AI Business Intelligence

Technology stack, business insights, and market analysis powered by AI.

Business Intelligence

Market & Strategic Analysis

The company targets a specialized segment of the tourism industry focused on accessibility for disabled persons in Latvia. Its competitive advantage lies in curated travel routes and a database of accessible service providers. The business model is service-oriented, offering group and individual excursions with adapted transport. Revenue likely derives from tour bookings. The website content and social media channels indicate active engagement with the target audience. No parent or subsidiary companies are identified. The business appears small and locally focused with growth potential in accessible tourism. Lack of detailed contact information and WHOIS transparency are minor concerns for credibility.

Extracted Contact Information

Marketing Intelligence Data

Email Addresses (1)

j*****@inbox.lv

Security Posture Analysis

Comprehensive Security Assessment

The website employs HTTPS but lacks critical security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options. The login form is basic without visible CSRF tokens or multi-factor authentication options. No evidence of vulnerability scanning or incident response policies is found. Privacy compliance is limited, with no cookie consent or GDPR explicit statements beyond a basic privacy policy. No security certifications or vulnerability disclosure policies are present. Overall, the security maturity is low to moderate, suitable for a small business but requiring improvements to protect user data and enhance trust.

Strategic Recommendations

Priority Actions for Security Improvement

1

Implement standard security headers including CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to improve browser security.

Observations

AI-powered comprehensive website and business analysis.

AI-Enhanced Website Analysis

Business Insights

Description:

Tūrisms, kas pielāgots cilvēkiem ar dzirdes, redzes vai kustību traucējumiem, kā arī cilvēkiem ar apgrūtinātām pārvietošanās iespējam. Piedāvā ekskursijas nelielās grupās ar pielāgotiem transportlīdzekļiem, maršrutus cilvēkiem ar invaliditāti Latvijā.

Key Services:
Accessible group excursionsCustomized travel routes for individuals with disabilitiesDatabase of accessible service providers and locations
Content Quality:

good

Branding:

consistent

Technical Stack

Technologies:
jQuery 2.2.4Fancybox 3BannerplayResponsiveVideosMozlive
Performance:

moderate

Mobile:

good

Accessibility:

basic

SEO:

basic

Security Assessment

Security Score:
55/100
Best Practices:
  • HTTPS usage implied by canonical URL
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics & Tracking

Tracking Level:minimal
Privacy Compliance:poor

Advertising & Marketing

Transparency Level:poor

Website Quality Assessment

Design Quality:good
User Experience:good
Content Relevance:good
Navigation Clarity:good
Professionalism:good
Trustworthiness:moderate

Key Observations

1

Website is fully accessible and not blocked by WAF or security mechanisms.

🛡️Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis and recommendations.

Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis

20/100
Score

Missing Strict-Transport-Security header

HIGH

Forces HTTPS connections

Missing X-Frame-Options header

HIGH

Prevents clickjacking attacks

Missing X-Content-Type-Options header

MEDIUM

Prevents MIME type sniffing

Missing Content-Security-Policy header

HIGH

Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

Missing X-XSS-Protection header

MEDIUM

Legacy XSS protection (deprecated but still recommended)

Missing Referrer-Policy header

LOW

Controls referrer information sent with requests

Missing Permissions-Policy header

MEDIUM

Controls browser features and APIs

👤GDPR Compliance

Privacy and data protection assessment under GDPR regulations.

GDPR Compliance

Privacy and data protection assessment

35/100
Score

No Privacy Policy found

HIGH

GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

No Cookie Policy found

HIGH

GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

No Cookie Consent Banner found

HIGH

GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

Third-party services without privacy policy

HIGH

Detected services: Facebook

GDPR Compliance Analysis

Privacy Policy0% confidence
Cookie Policy0% confidence
Contact Information Found90% confidence
emailphone

🛡️NIS2 Compliance

Network & Information Security Directive compliance assessment.

NIS2 Compliance

Network & Information Security Directive

2/100
Score

No information security framework found

HIGH

NIS2 requires documented cybersecurity and information security measures

No vulnerability disclosure policy

MEDIUM

NIS2 encourages coordinated vulnerability disclosure

No security policy documentation found

HIGH

NIS2 requires documented cybersecurity governance and risk management

No incident response procedures found

HIGH

NIS2 requires documented incident response and business continuity plans

No business continuity planning found

MEDIUM

NIS2 emphasizes operational resilience and business continuity

No security contact information

HIGH

NIS2 requires clear incident reporting channels

No vulnerability reporting mechanism

MEDIUM

Clear vulnerability reporting supports coordinated disclosure

No NIS2 reference found

LOW

Consider explicitly mentioning NIS2 compliance efforts

Critical sector without clear security compliance

HIGH

Detected sectors: transport, digital

📧Email Security

SPF, DKIM, and DMARC validation and email security assessment.

Email Security

SPF, DKIM, and DMARC validation

70/100
Score

No DKIM record found

MEDIUM

DKIM adds cryptographic signatures to emails

No BIMI Record

LOW

BIMI displays brand logos in email clients

No MTA-STS Policy

MEDIUM

MTA-STS enforces TLS for email delivery

No TLS-RPT Record

LOW

TLS-RPT provides reporting for email TLS issues

SPF
Sender Policy Framework
DKIM
DomainKeys Identified Mail
DMARC
Domain-based Message Authentication
MX Records
Mail Exchange Records
BIMI
Brand Indicators
MTA-STS
Mail Transfer Agent Security
TLS-RPT
TLS Reporting
DNSSEC
DNS Security
SPF Details
Record:
v=spf1 include:inbox.eu ~all
DNS Lookups:1/10
Policy:~all

🏆SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis.

SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis

75/100
Score

SSL Certificate Expires Within 90 Days

MEDIUM

SSL certificate expires in 79 days

Weak SSL Key Length

HIGH

SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

Partial SSL/TLS Assessment

LOW

Completed 2 of 4 security checks due to time constraints

Certificate Details

Subject:difftravel.org
Issuer:WE1
Valid Until:10/18/2025 (79 days)
SANs:difftravel.org, *.difftravel.org

OCSP Status

OCSP Stapling Disabled

📊DNS Health

DNS configuration and security assessment.

DNS Health

DNS configuration and security assessment

70/100
Score

DNSSEC Not Enabled

MEDIUM

DNSSEC is not configured for this domain

CAA Records Not Configured

LOW

Certificate Authority Authorization (CAA) records not found

Domain Delete Lock Not Enabled

LOW

Domain can be deleted without additional verification

No DMARC Record

MEDIUM

DMARC policy not configured

Domain Registration Details

Domain Age
3 years(established)
Expiry Risk
low(101 days)
Protection Level
basicDNSSEC OFF

DNS Records

A Records:172.67.139.34, 104.21.87.11
AAAA Records:2606:4700:3034::ac43:8b22, 2606:4700:3037::6815:570b
Name Servers:
casey.ns.cloudflare.com
maeve.ns.cloudflare.com
MX Records:
10: mx.inbox.eu
SOA:Serial: 2378692119, TTL: 1800s

DNSSEC Status

DNSSEC Not Enabled

DNS Performance

Resolution Time:445ms

SPF Analysis

SPF Record:
v=spf1 include:inbox.eu ~all

Network Security

Port scanning and network exposure analysis.

Network Security

Port scanning and network exposure analysis

100/100
Score

Good Network Security Posture

LOW

No unnecessary services detected on common risky ports

🔧Technical Analysis

Detailed technical findings and analysis from AI assessment.

Technical Analysis

Comprehensive security assessment findings

Additional Findings

The website uses a combination of Mozello CMS and Amazon CloudFront CDN for hosting and content delivery. JavaScript libraries include jQuery 2.2.4, Fancybox 3, Bannerplay, and ResponsiveVideos, indicating a moderately modern but not cutting-edge tech stack. The site is mobile responsive and uses custom fonts and CSS for styling. Performance is moderate with no major issues detected. SEO is basic with meta description and canonical tags present but no structured data or Open Graph tags found. Accessibility is basic with some ARIA roles but no advanced features. The site lacks analytics or tracking scripts, indicating minimal user data collection. Overall, the technical implementation is adequate for a small business website but could benefit from modernization and enhanced SEO and accessibility features.
Analyze Another Website