Skip to main content

Is tervete.tarzans.lv a Scam? Security Check Results - Tērvetes Tarzāna parks Reviews

tervete.tarzans.lv favicon

Is tervete.tarzans.lv Safe? Security Analysis for Tērvetes Tarzāna parks

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

Amusement parkLatvia
Analyzed 7/30/2025Completed 7:43:39 PM
28
Security Score
HIGH RISK

Security scan incomplete. 3 out of 9 security checks failed to complete. The website may be inaccessible or protected by security measures. Please retry the scan or verify the website is accessible.

🧠AI Business Intelligence

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

Business Intelligence

Market & Strategic Analysis

The business behind the website is likely a small local entity operating in Latvia, possibly related to tourism or local services given the domain and site title. The lack of explicit business information, contact details, or certifications limits the ability to assess market positioning or competitive advantages. The use of Google Analytics and Tag Manager suggests some engagement with digital marketing, but the absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates compliance gaps. No partnerships or subsidiaries are identified from the available data. The business model appears to be informational or service-oriented, but further details are not discernible from the content provided.

Extracted Contact Information

Marketing Intelligence Data

Email Addresses (5)

t*****@tarzans.lv
l*****@tarzans.lv
t*****@tarzans.lv
j*****@tarzans.lv
d*****@tarzans.lv

Security Posture Analysis

Comprehensive Security Assessment

The security maturity of the website is low. The site uses HTTPS (implied by the URL), but no security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, or X-Content-Type-Options are detected. There is no evidence of a security policy, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure programs. The forms and inputs are not detailed in the provided content, so secure handling cannot be confirmed. Tracking technologies are present without visible consent mechanisms, raising privacy compliance concerns. Overall, the site lacks robust security and privacy controls, which could expose it to risks and reduce user trust.

Strategic Recommendations

Priority Actions for Security Improvement

1

Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance statements.

Observations

AI-powered comprehensive website and business analysis.

AI-Enhanced Website Analysis

Business Insights

Content Quality:

basic

Branding:

moderate

Technical Stack

Technologies:
FontAwesome 4.7.0Google AnalyticsGoogle Tag ManagerjQuery (implied by analytics.js)Custom JavaScript and CSS
Performance:

moderate

Mobile:

good

Accessibility:

basic

SEO:

basic

Security Assessment

Security Score:
40/100

Analytics & Tracking

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

Advertising & Marketing

Transparency Level:basic

Website Quality Assessment

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

Key Observations

1

Website is accessible with no WAF or blocking detected.

🛡️Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis and recommendations.

Security Headers

HTTP security headers analysis

0/100
Score
Analysis failed - content could not be retrieved

👤GDPR Compliance

Privacy and data protection assessment under GDPR regulations.

GDPR Compliance

Privacy and data protection assessment

0/100
Score
Analysis failed - content could not be retrieved

🛡️NIS2 Compliance

Network & Information Security Directive compliance assessment.

NIS2 Compliance

Network & Information Security Directive

0/100
Score
Analysis failed - content could not be retrieved

📧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 ip4:91.105.203.99 +a +mx +ip4:91.105.203.93 +ip4:91.105.203.94 +ip4:80.232.195.158 +include:_spf.google.com ~all
DNS Lookups:3/10
Policy:~all
DKIM Selectors Found
Selector:default(1416-bit rsa)
DMARC Details
Policy:quarantine
Aggregate Reports:i8awixud@ag.dmarcian.com
Forensic Reports:i8awixud@fr.dmarcian.com

🏆SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis.

SSL/TLS Security

Certificate validity and encryption analysis

52/100
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 75 days

Weak SSL Key Length

HIGH

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

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

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 Transfer Lock Not Enabled

MEDIUM

Domain can be transferred without authorization

Domain Delete Lock Not Enabled

LOW

Domain can be deleted without additional verification

Domain Registration Details

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

DNS Records

A Records:91.105.203.99
Name Servers:
ns1.colo.lv
ns2.colo.lv
MX Records:
0: tarzans.lv
SOA:Serial: 2025071601, TTL: 86400s

DNSSEC Status

DNSSEC Not Enabled

DNS Performance

Resolution Time:240ms

SPF Analysis

SPF Record:
v=spf1 ip4:91.105.203.99 +a +mx +ip4:91.105.203.93 +ip4:91.105.203.94 +ip4:80.232.195.158 +include:_spf.google.com ~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

Service Exposed: SSH

MEDIUM

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

Analyze Another Website