Skip to main content

Is jak.lv a Scam? Security Check Results - jak.lv Reviews

J

Is jak.lv Safe? Security Analysis for Visitor anti-robot validation

Check if jak.lv is a scam or legitimate. Free security scan and reviews.

TechnologyN/asmall
HTML5CSS3JavaScriptGoogle AnalyticsGoogle Tag Manager+2 more
Analyzed 9/30/2025Completed 11:19:33 AM
46
Security Score
HIGH RISK

AI Summary

The website jekabpils.jak.lv serves as a security validation gateway powered by BitNinja, designed to block IP addresses suspected of violating server security policies and to prevent automated bot access. Visitors are required to complete a CAPTCHA challenge to proceed, indicating the site functions primarily as a protective layer rather than a traditional business or content site. The page includes multilingual support and integrates Google reCAPTCHA and Google Analytics for bot mitigation and visitor tracking. Technically, the site uses legacy CMS meta tags referencing Joomla 1.5 and WordPress 2.5, though the actual content is minimal and focused on security validation. The presence of Google Analytics and Tag Manager scripts indicates moderate tracking capabilities. However, the site lacks modern security headers and explicit privacy or cookie policies, which limits its compliance posture. From a security perspective, the site demonstrates basic bot mitigation practices but shows potential risks due to outdated CMS references and absence of advanced security headers. The domain WHOIS data is privacy protected, which is typical for security-related services but limits transparency. Overall, the site is a security checkpoint rather than a business-facing website, with limited content and no direct business or contact information. Strategically, the site should enhance its security posture by updating CMS components, implementing modern security headers, and publishing clear privacy and cookie policies to improve trust and compliance. Given its role as a security gateway, maintaining robust bot mitigation and clear user guidance is critical.

Detected Technologies

HTML5CSS3JavaScriptGoogle AnalyticsGoogle Tag ManagerGoogle reCAPTCHA v2BitNinja security platform

🧠AI Business Intelligence

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

Business Intelligence

Market & Strategic Analysis

The website operates as a security checkpoint service, likely part of or using BitNinja's security platform to protect web assets from malicious traffic. Its business model revolves around cybersecurity services, specifically IP blocking and CAPTCHA validation to prevent automated attacks. The target audience is general web visitors who are temporarily blocked due to suspicious activity. There is no direct commercial offering or detailed company information, indicating the site is a functional security layer rather than a standalone business entity. The lack of contact details and business descriptions suggests limited market positioning and no visible partnerships or subsidiaries. The site’s competitive advantage lies in its integration with BitNinja's security infrastructure, providing automated bot mitigation and greylisting capabilities.

Security Posture Analysis

Comprehensive Security Assessment

The security posture is moderate but limited by the absence of explicit security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, or X-Frame-Options. The use of Google reCAPTCHA and BitNinja's greylisting indicates proactive bot mitigation. However, the outdated CMS meta tags (Joomla 1.5 and WordPress 2.5) suggest potential vulnerabilities if the underlying CMS is not updated. No privacy or cookie policies are present, which is a compliance gap. The site uses HTTPS (implied by recaptcha.net and Google Analytics scripts loaded over HTTPS), but SSL configuration details are not provided. Incident response and security policy information are missing, limiting transparency. Overall, the site functions as a security gate but would benefit from enhanced security headers, updated CMS, and published policies.

Strategic Recommendations

Priority Actions for Security Improvement

1

Implement modern HTTP security headers including CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.

Observations

AI-powered comprehensive website and business analysis.

AI-Enhanced Website Analysis

BitNinja Detected

The page is a security challenge page by BitNinja, blocking IPs and requiring CAPTCHA validation before access.

Analysis results may be incomplete. For accurate analysis, please contact guard@offseq.com

Business Insights

Description:

This website is a security validation page that requires visitors to complete a CAPTCHA to continue browsing. It is designed to block IP addresses suspected of violating server security rules and to prevent automated malicious visits.

Key Services:
IP blockingCAPTCHA validationbot mitigation
Content Quality:

basic

Branding:

moderate

Technical Stack

Technologies:
HTML5CSS3JavaScriptGoogle AnalyticsGoogle Tag ManagerGoogle reCAPTCHA v2BitNinja security platform
Frameworks:
Joomla! 1.5WordPress 2.5 (meta tags only)
Performance:

moderate

Mobile:

basic

Accessibility:

basic

SEO:

poor

Security Assessment

Security Score:
40/100
Best Practices:
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA for bot mitigation
  • IP blocking and greylisting via BitNinja

Analytics & Tracking

Services:
Google AnalyticsGoogle Tag Manager
Tracking Level:moderate
Privacy Compliance:poor

Advertising & Marketing

Transparency Level:poor

Website Quality Assessment

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

Key Observations

1

Website is a security CAPTCHA challenge page by BitNinja

🛡️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

10/100
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

EU business without adequate privacy measures

CRITICAL

EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

Third-party services without privacy policy

HIGH

Detected services: Google Analytics

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

17/100
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

📧Email Security

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

Email Security

SPF, DKIM, and DMARC validation

70/100
Score

DMARC not enforcing

MEDIUM

DMARC policy is set to "none"

No DMARC reporting

LOW

DMARC aggregate reports not configured

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 ip4:95.211.208.241 include:relay.mailchannels.net ip4:213.227.132.36 include:spf.protection.outlook.com -all
DNS Lookups:2/10
Policy:-all
DKIM Selectors Found
Selector:default(1416-bit rsa)
DMARC Details
Policy:none
Subdomain Policy:none

🏆SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis.

SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis

57/100
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 71 days

HSTS Not Enabled

MEDIUM

HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) is not configured

Protocol Support

TLSv1.3TLSv1.2TLSv1.1

OCSP Status

OCSP Stapling Disabled

📊DNS Health

DNS configuration and security assessment.

DNS Health

DNS configuration and security assessment

65/100
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

DMARC Policy Set to None

LOW

DMARC is configured but not enforcing any policy

Domain Registration Details

Protection Level
none
Suspicious Indicators Detected
  • No domain protection locks enabled

DNS Records

A Records:95.211.208.241
Name Servers:
ns1.areait.lv
ns2.areait.lv
ns3.areait.lv
MX Records:
0: jak-lv.mail.protection.outlook.com
1: jak-lv.mail.protection.outlook.com
1: jak-lv.mail.eo.outlook.com
0: jak-lv.mail.eo.outlook.com
50: jaklv.sharepiont.com
SOA:Serial: 2025091200, TTL: 86400s

DNSSEC Status

DNSSEC Not Enabled

DNS Performance

Resolution Time:55ms

SPF Analysis

SPF Record:
v=spf1 ip4:95.211.208.241 include:relay.mailchannels.net ip4:213.227.132.36 include:spf.protection.outlook.com -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 legacy CMS indicated by meta tags (Joomla 1.5 and WordPress 2.5), though the actual content is minimal and focused on security validation. The tech stack includes HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, and Google reCAPTCHA v2. The site is mobile responsive at a basic level and uses inline CSS styles for layout and design. Performance is moderate given the lightweight content but could be improved by removing legacy CMS references and optimizing scripts. Accessibility and SEO optimizations are minimal, with no structured data or Open Graph tags detected. Hosting provider details are not available from the content. The site’s primary function as a security challenge page limits typical website features.
Analyze Another Website