Skip to main content

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

R

Is rrx.lv Safe? Security Analysis for Index of /

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

OtherN/asmall
Analyzed 7/30/2025Completed 9:52:22 PM
34
Security Score
HIGH RISK

AI Summary

The website at https://rrx.lv/ currently serves only a default directory index page with no substantive content or metadata. There is no visible business information, contact details, or policies, indicating the site is either inactive or a placeholder. The lack of WHOIS data due to query limits further limits the ability to verify ownership or legitimacy. Technically, the site lacks HTTPS and security headers, which poses security risks and reduces trustworthiness. Overall, the digital maturity is very low, with minimal infrastructure and no compliance indicators. Security posture is weak, with no evident protections or policies. The overall risk is elevated due to lack of transparency and security best practices, and the site should not be considered reliable or trustworthy in its current state.

🧠AI Business Intelligence

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

Business Intelligence

Market & Strategic Analysis

No business intelligence can be derived from the website content as it lacks any descriptive or identifying information. There are no indications of market positioning, business model, or services. The domain appears unused or under development. No partnerships or certifications are visible. The absence of contact or company data prevents any meaningful business analysis.

Security Posture Analysis

Comprehensive Security Assessment

The security posture is poor due to absence of HTTPS, security headers, and any visible security policies. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are present. The site does not demonstrate GDPR compliance or data protection practices. The lack of WHOIS data further obscures ownership and accountability. This represents a high risk for users and undermines trust.

Strategic Recommendations

Priority Actions for Security Improvement

1

Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate immediately to secure communications.

Observations

AI-powered comprehensive website and business analysis.

AI-Enhanced Website Analysis

Business Insights

Content Quality:

poor

Branding:

inconsistent

Technical Stack

Performance:

moderate

Mobile:

poor

Accessibility:

poor

SEO:

poor

Security Assessment

Security Score:
30/100

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 a default directory index page with no substantive content.

🛡️Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis and recommendations.

Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis

15/100
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

Sensitive data may be cached

LOW

Cache-Control header should include "no-store" for sensitive pages

👤GDPR Compliance

Privacy and data protection assessment under GDPR regulations.

GDPR Compliance

Privacy and data protection assessment

15/100
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

EU business without adequate privacy measures

CRITICAL

EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

GDPR Compliance Analysis

Privacy Policy0% confidence
Cookie Policy0% confidence

🛡️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

60/100
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

No email authentication configured

CRITICAL

Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

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

🏆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 70 days

Partial SSL/TLS Assessment

LOW

Completed 3 of 4 security checks due to time constraints

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

75/100
Score

DNSSEC Not Enabled

MEDIUM

DNSSEC is not configured for this domain

CAA Records Not Configured

LOW

Certificate Authority Authorization (CAA) records not found

No DMARC Record

MEDIUM

DMARC policy not configured

DNS Records

A Records:89.111.23.114
Name Servers:
nsa.hostnet.lvDNS only
nsb.hostnet.lvDNS only
MX Records:
10: mail.rrx.lv
SOA:Serial: 2015122805, TTL: 3600s

DNSSEC Status

DNSSEC Not Enabled

DNS Performance

Resolution Time:192ms

Network Security

Port scanning and network exposure analysis.

Network Security

Port scanning and network exposure analysis

0/100
Score

High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

HIGH

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

Service Exposed: SSH

MEDIUM

Port 22 (SSH) is publicly accessible - SSH - Secure but can be brute-forced

Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

CRITICAL

Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

🔧Technical Analysis

Detailed technical findings and analysis from AI assessment.

Technical Analysis

Comprehensive security assessment findings

Additional Findings

The website is a barebones directory listing with no metadata, scripts, or frameworks detected. No CMS or hosting provider information is available. The site lacks mobile optimization and accessibility features. Performance is likely moderate due to minimal content but overall user experience is poor. The absence of SEO elements and structured data limits discoverability. Technical debt is high as the site is essentially non-functional as a business or service platform.
Analyze Another Website