Skip to main content

Is elizings.org a Scam? Security Check Results - SIA "ELizings.lv" Reviews

S

Is elizings.org Safe? Security Analysis for SIA "ELizings.lv"

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

OtherLatviasmall
jQuery 3.7.1
Analyzed 7/31/2025Completed 4:16:55 AM
40
Security Score
HIGH RISK

AI Summary

The website elizings.org is registered to SIA "ELizings.lv", a Latvian company established in 2020. The site currently contains minimal content limited to a header with a logo image and basic technical inclusions such as jQuery and Google Fonts. There is no visible business description, contact information, or user engagement features. The lack of privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies indicates low maturity in compliance and user trust aspects. Technically, the site uses modern libraries but lacks HTTPS and security headers, which are critical for secure communications and user data protection. Overall, the digital presence is underdeveloped, limiting the company's ability to engage users or demonstrate professionalism online.

Detected Technologies

jQuery 3.7.1

🧠AI Business Intelligence

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

Business Intelligence

Market & Strategic Analysis

The company appears to be a small Latvian entity with no clear public-facing business model or service description on the website. The domain age is consistent with a relatively new business. Absence of contact details and policies suggests the website may be in early development or used for limited purposes. No partnerships or subsidiaries are evident. The lack of marketing or analytics tools indicates minimal digital marketing efforts. The business sector is unclear but categorized as 'Other' due to insufficient information.

Security Posture Analysis

Comprehensive Security Assessment

The website lacks HTTPS, security headers, and any visible security or incident response policies, indicating a low security maturity level. No vulnerability disclosures or security certifications are present. The absence of privacy and cookie policies also suggests non-compliance with GDPR requirements. These gaps expose the business to potential risks including data interception and regulatory penalties. No tracking or analytics scripts reduce privacy concerns but also limit business insights. Overall, the security posture is weak and requires significant improvements.

Strategic Recommendations

Priority Actions for Security Improvement

1

Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate to secure user connections.

Observations

AI-powered comprehensive website and business analysis.

AI-Enhanced Website Analysis

Business Insights

Company:

SIA "ELizings.lv"

Content Quality:

poor

Branding:

moderate

Technical Stack

Technologies:
jQuery 3.7.1
Performance:

moderate

Mobile:

basic

Accessibility:

basic

SEO:

poor

Security Assessment

0

Analytics & Tracking

Tracking Level:minimal
Privacy Compliance:poor

Advertising & Marketing

Transparency Level:poor

Website Quality Assessment

Design Quality:poor
User Experience:poor
Content Relevance:poor
Navigation Clarity:poor
Professionalism:poor
Trustworthiness:low

Key Observations

1

Website content is minimal with only a header and logo image.

🛡️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

25/100
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

Insufficient contact information

MEDIUM

GDPR requires organizations to provide clear contact details

Third-party services without privacy policy

HIGH

Detected services: Google APIs

GDPR Compliance Analysis

Privacy Policy0% confidence
Cookie Policy0% confidence

🛡️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

85/100
Score

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 ip4:91.203.68.162 include:_spf.if28.nano.lv +a +mx +ip4:85.31.97.39 ~all
DNS Lookups:3/10
Policy:~all
DKIM Selectors Found
Selector:default(1416-bit rsa)

🏆SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis.

SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis

72/100
Score

Weak Protocols Supported

HIGH

Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

OCSP Stapling Not Enabled

LOW

OCSP stapling improves performance and privacy

Certificate Transparency Not Implemented

LOW

Certificate is not logged in Certificate Transparency logs

SSL Certificate Expires Within 90 Days

MEDIUM

SSL certificate expires in 40 days

Partial SSL/TLS Assessment

LOW

Completed 3 of 4 security checks due to time constraints

Protocol Support

TLSv1.2TLSv1.3TLSv1.1

OCSP Status

OCSP Stapling Disabled

📊DNS Health

DNS configuration and security assessment.

DNS Health

DNS configuration and security assessment

60/100
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 Transfer Lock Not Enabled

MEDIUM

Domain can be transferred without authorization

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
4 years(established)
Expiry Risk
low(89 days)
Protection Level
noneDNSSEC OFF
Suspicious Indicators Detected
  • No domain protection locks enabled

DNS Records

A Records:91.203.68.162
Name Servers:
ns.nano.lv
ns2.nano.lv
MX Records:
0: elizings.org
SOA:Serial: 2025071704, TTL: 86400s

DNSSEC Status

DNSSEC Not Enabled

DNS Performance

Resolution Time:186ms

SPF Analysis

SPF Record:
v=spf1 ip4:91.203.68.162 include:_spf.if28.nano.lv +a +mx +ip4:85.31.97.39 ~all

Network Security

Port scanning and network exposure analysis.

Network Security

Port scanning and network exposure analysis

20/100
Score

High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

HIGH

Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

🔧Technical Analysis

Detailed technical findings and analysis from AI assessment.

Technical Analysis

Comprehensive security assessment findings

Additional Findings

The website uses jQuery 3.7.1 and Google Fonts loaded from trusted CDNs, indicating some use of modern web technologies. However, the site lacks HTTPS and security headers, which are critical for secure and trustworthy web presence. The HTML content is minimal and lacks meta tags for SEO or accessibility features. Performance is likely moderate due to minimal content but mobile optimization and accessibility are basic at best. No CMS or hosting provider information is available from the data. Overall, the technical implementation is basic and requires modernization and security enhancements.
Analyze Another Website