Vulnerability Scan Result

Target:

http://pourandsip.com/ (redirect)

Scanned target: https://pourandsip.com/

Submitted: Nov 03, 2025 from CG

Public Scan

Scan mode: Passive (non-intrusive)

Summary

medium

Info

Low

Medium

High

Critical

Screenshot

Screenshot could not be taken.

Title:	Whisky Subscription Club \| The UK's Best \| Pour & Sip
Description:	Pour & Sip whisky subscription delivers five whisky tasters straight to your door each month, hand-picked by experts. Join our fun-filled live tastings, discounts on bottles, and an awesome whisky-loving community!

IP Information

ip_address	23.227.38.65
country	CA
network_name	Cloudflare Inc
asn	AS13335

Open Ports

80/tcp	http	Cloudflare http proxy -
443/tcp	https	Cloudflare http proxy -
2082/tcp	http	Cloudflare http proxy -
2083/tcp	https	nginx -
2086/tcp	http	Cloudflare http proxy -
2087/tcp	https	nginx -
8080/tcp	http	Cloudflare http proxy -
8443/tcp	https	Cloudflare http proxy -

Web Technologies

Software / Version	Category
Affiliate Future	Affiliate programs
EasyGift	Shopify apps
Instafeed	Shopify apps
cdnjs	CDN
Google Font API	Font scripts
HTTP/3	Miscellaneous
jQuery	JavaScript libraries
Open Graph	Miscellaneous
OWL Carousel	JavaScript libraries
PayPal	Payment processors
Recharge	Payment processors
Rise.ai	Loyalty & rewards, Referral marketing
Shop Pay	Payment processors
Shopify	Ecommerce
Vue.js	JavaScript frameworks
Priority Hints	Performance
Apple Pay	Payment processors
Cloudflare	CDN
Google Tag Manager	Tag managers
OneTrust	Cookie compliance
HSTS	Security
Cart Functionality	Ecommerce
Zoorix	Ecommerce

Web Application Vulnerabilities

Evidence

URL	Cookie Name	Evidence
https://pourandsip.com/	localization, cart_currency	Set-Cookie: localization=GB Set-Cookie: cart_currency=GBP

Vulnerability description

We found that a cookie has been set without the Secure flag, which means the browser will send it over an unencrypted channel (plain HTTP) if such a request is made. The root cause for this usually revolves around misconfigurations in the code or server settings.

Risk description

The risk exists that an attacker will intercept the clear-text communication between the browser and the server and he will steal the cookie of the user. If this is a session cookie, the attacker could gain unauthorized access to the victim's web session.

Recommendation

Whenever a cookie contains sensitive information or is a session token, then it should always be passed using an encrypted channel. Ensure that the secure flag is set for cookies containing such sensitive information.

Classification

CWE	CWE-614
OWASP Top 10 - 2017
OWASP Top 10 - 2021

Evidence

URL	Cookie Name	Evidence
https://pourandsip.com/	localization, cart_currency	The server responded with Set-Cookie header(s) that does not specify the HttpOnly flag: Set-Cookie: localization=GB Set-Cookie: cart_currency=GBP

Vulnerability description

We found that a cookie has been set without the HttpOnly flag, which means it can be accessed by potentially malicious JavaScript code running inside the web page. The root cause for this usually revolves around misconfigurations in the code or server settings.

Risk description

The risk is that an attacker who injects malicious JavaScript code on the page (e.g. by using an XSS attack) can access the cookie and can send it to another site. In case of a session cookie, this could lead to session hijacking.

Recommendation

Ensure that the HttpOnly flag is set for all cookies.

Classification

CWE	CWE-1004
OWASP Top 10 - 2017
OWASP Top 10 - 2021

Evidence

Software / Version	Category
Affiliate Future	Affiliate programs
EasyGift	Shopify apps
Instafeed	Shopify apps
cdnjs	CDN
Google Font API	Font scripts
HTTP/3	Miscellaneous
jQuery	JavaScript libraries
Open Graph	Miscellaneous
OWL Carousel	JavaScript libraries
PayPal	Payment processors
Recharge	Payment processors
Rise.ai	Loyalty & rewards, Referral marketing
Shop Pay	Payment processors
Shopify	Ecommerce
Vue.js	JavaScript frameworks
Priority Hints	Performance
Apple Pay	Payment processors
Cloudflare	CDN
Google Tag Manager	Tag managers
OneTrust	Cookie compliance
HSTS	Security
Cart Functionality	Ecommerce
Zoorix	Ecommerce

Vulnerability description

We noticed that server software and technology details are exposed, potentially aiding attackers in tailoring specific exploits against identified systems and versions.

Risk description

The risk is that an attacker could use this information to mount specific attacks against the identified software type and version.

Recommendation

We recommend you to eliminate the information which permits the identification of software platform, technology, server and operating system: HTTP server headers, HTML meta information, etc.

Evidence

URL	Evidence
https://pourandsip.com/contact	Response headers do not include the HTTP Strict-Transport-Security header

Vulnerability description

We noticed that the target application lacks the HTTP Strict-Transport-Security header in its responses. This security header is crucial as it instructs browsers to only establish secure (HTTPS) connections with the web server and reject any HTTP connections.

Risk description

The risk is that lack of this header permits an attacker to force a victim user to initiate a clear-text HTTP connection to the server, thus opening the possibility to eavesdrop on the network traffic and extract sensitive information (e.g. session cookies).

Recommendation

The Strict-Transport-Security HTTP header should be sent with each HTTPS response. The syntax is as follows: `Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=<seconds>[; includeSubDomains]` The parameter `max-age` gives the time frame for requirement of HTTPS in seconds and should be chosen quite high, e.g. several months. A value below 7776000 is considered as too low by this scanner check. The flag `includeSubDomains` defines that the policy applies also for sub domains of the sender of the response.

Classification

CWE	CWE-693
OWASP Top 10 - 2017
OWASP Top 10 - 2021

Evidence

URL Evidence

URL	Evidence
https://pourandsip.com/	Response headers include the HTTP Content-Security-Policy security header with the following security issues:`default-src: The default-src directive should be set as a fall-back when other restrictions have not been specified. script-src: script-src directive is missing. base-uri: Missing base-uri allows the injection of base tags. They can be used to set the base URL for all relative (script) URLs to an attacker controlled domain. We recommend setting it to 'none' or 'self'. object-src: Missing object-src allows the injection of plugins which can execute JavaScript. We recommend setting it to 'none'.`

https://pourandsip.com/

Response headers include the HTTP Content-Security-Policy security header with the following security issues:default-src: The default-src directive should be set as a fall-back when other restrictions have not been specified. script-src: script-src directive is missing. base-uri: Missing base-uri allows the injection of base tags. They can be used to set the base URL for all relative (script) URLs to an attacker controlled domain. We recommend setting it to 'none' or 'self'. object-src: Missing object-src allows the injection of plugins which can execute JavaScript. We recommend setting it to 'none'.

Vulnerability description

We noticed that the Content-Security-Policy (CSP) header configured for the web application includes unsafe directives. The CSP header activates a protection mechanism implemented in web browsers which prevents exploitation of Cross-Site Scripting vulnerabilities (XSS) by restricting the sources from which content can be loaded or executed.

Risk description

For example, if the unsafe-inline directive is present in the CSP header, the execution of inline scripts and event handlers is allowed. This can be exploited by an attacker to execute arbitrary JavaScript code in the context of the vulnerable application.

Recommendation

Remove the unsafe values from the directives, adopt nonces or hashes for safer inclusion of inline scripts if they are needed, and explicitly define the sources from which scripts, styles, images or other resources can be loaded.

Classification

CWE	CWE-693
OWASP Top 10 - 2017
OWASP Top 10 - 2021

Evidence

URL
https://pourandsip.com/robots.txt

Vulnerability description

We found the robots.txt on the target server. This file instructs web crawlers what URLs and endpoints of the web application they can visit and crawl. Website administrators often misuse this file while attempting to hide some web pages from the users.

Risk description

There is no particular security risk in having a robots.txt file. However, it's important to note that adding endpoints in it should not be considered a security measure, as this file can be directly accessed and read by anyone.

Recommendation

We recommend you to manually review the entries from robots.txt and remove the ones which lead to sensitive locations in the website (ex. administration panels, configuration files, etc).

Evidence

URL	Evidence
https://pourandsip.com/	Response headers do not include the Referrer-Policy HTTP security header as well as the `<meta/>` tag with name 'referrer' is not present in the response.

Vulnerability description

We noticed that the target application's server responses lack the Referrer-Policy HTTP header, which controls how much referrer information the browser will send with each request originated from the current web application.

Risk description

The risk is that if a user visits a web page (e.g. "http://example.com/pricing/") and clicks on a link from that page going to e.g. "https://www.google.com", the browser will send to Google the full originating URL in the `Referer` header, assuming the Referrer-Policy header is not set. The originating URL could be considered sensitive information and it could be used for user tracking.

Recommendation

The Referrer-Policy header should be configured on the server side to avoid user tracking and inadvertent information leakage. The value `no-referrer` of this header instructs the browser to omit the Referer header entirely.

Classification

CWE	CWE-693
OWASP Top 10 - 2017
OWASP Top 10 - 2021

Evidence

URL	Evidence
https://pourandsip.com/contact	Response does not include the HTTP Content-Security-Policy security header or meta tag

Vulnerability description

We noticed that the target application lacks the Content-Security-Policy (CSP) header in its HTTP responses. The CSP header is a security measure that instructs web browsers to enforce specific security rules, effectively preventing the exploitation of Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities.

Risk description

The risk is that if the target application is vulnerable to XSS, lack of this header makes it easily exploitable by attackers.

Recommendation

Configure the Content-Security-Header to be sent with each HTTP response in order to apply the specific policies needed by the application.

Classification

CWE	CWE-693
OWASP Top 10 - 2017
OWASP Top 10 - 2021

Evidence

URL
Missing: https://pourandsip.com/.well-known/security.txt

Vulnerability description

We have noticed that the server is missing the security.txt file, which is considered a good practice for web security. It provides a standardized way for security researchers and the public to report security vulnerabilities or concerns by outlining the preferred method of contact and reporting procedures.

Risk description

There is no particular risk in not having a security.txt file for your server. However, this file is important because it offers a designated channel for reporting vulnerabilities and security issues.

Recommendation

We recommend you to implement the security.txt file according to the standard, in order to allow researchers or users report any security issues they find, improving the defensive mechanisms of your server.

Evidence

URL	Method	Parameters	Evidence
https://pourandsip.com/pages/consumer-terms-of-business	GET	Headers: User-Agent=Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/108.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Cookies: _shopify_essential=:AZpJwIflAAEAUeBWblPE9FQFW0ArBg7mwn_6lzJToIVXIcgyHgukG32j7dIgYOqMkIO-1MWNOdgyjD3Pw3KVDULvWMfsRmr2dM70l3gGVVSGcIyUNY6NpgsCRh...	Email Address: customerservice@pourandsip.com

Vulnerability description

We noticed that this web application exposes email addresses, which might be unintended. While not inherently a vulnerability, this information could be leveraged in social engineering or spam related activities.

Risk description

The risk is that exposed email addresses within the application could be accessed by unauthorized parties. This could lead to privacy violations, spam, phishing attacks, or other forms of misuse.

Recommendation

Compartmentalize the application to have 'safe' areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow email addresses to go outside of the trust boundary, and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.

Classification

CWE	CWE-200
OWASP Top 10 - 2017
OWASP Top 10 - 2021

Infrastructure Vulnerabilities

Evidence

Domain Queried	DNS Record Type	Description	Value
_dmarc.pourandsip.com	TXT	Text record	"v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:andrew@atomsupplies.com; ruf=mailto:DMARC.report@atomsupplies.com; fo=0; adkim=r; aspf=s; rf=afrf; sp=reject"

Vulnerability description

We found that the target uses p=quarantine in the DMARC policy. When a DMARC policy is set to p=quarantine, emails that fail DMARC validation are delivered but placed in the recipient’s spam or junk folder. Although it offers some protection, this policy is less strict than p=reject, which blocks such emails entirely.

Risk description

While emails failing DMARC validation are sent to the spam folder, users may still retrieve them from there, leading to a higher risk of phishing and spoofing attacks succeeding. Moreover, less strict enforcement may allow more fraudulent emails to reach user inboxes if misclassified.

Recommendation

We recommend considering moving to a stricter policy, such as p=reject, where emails that fail DMARC validation are completely rejected rather than delivered to spam folders. This reduces the risk of users interacting with potentially malicious emails.

Evidence

DKIM selector	Key type	Key size	Value
google	rsa	726	"v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAk31daMKfVf7nv/MrceFX+5yQfY2X80RWu5tCtRSxkt2Gn8XtGrJ+wxAV6ybV2gXcIxmgKacvfoR4A" "TEftpgQ7/yV9SEpzByKpzI3oTctRncDBSLV8faqDnTXysbAkvPBx6dAUT+z8XdtA7jbaprOolbE7peGRTmOZIqA1fAehlEL90r4rib8oDNCbW7E6JZ7W73Q+FU/DqqQOjVpCscrFPc3YwybUn22yFz/Mnc9Zz7+XD+x+0L/gQMQ1Cr+UU1iUsnSiuDl44s2QHVMzse+50OoRvoA/uhmJrDB" "Z2Xl92zLeANfolZpkBzr7hPPtzCu3P1k4YN05sJM6/YTlbhsRwIDAQAB"

Vulnerability description

We found that the DKIM key length is under 1024-bit. When a DKIM (DomainKeys Identified Mail) key length is under 1024-bit, it is considered weak by modern cryptographic standards. Shorter key lengths, such as 512 or 768 bits, are vulnerable to brute-force attacks, where an attacker could potentially forge a valid DKIM signature for a domain. This undermines the entire purpose of DKIM, which is to authenticate email messages and prevent email spoofing by verifying that the message headers have not been tampered with. A DKIM key under 1024 bits significantly reduces the difficulty for attackers to break the signature.

Risk description

The primary risk of using a DKIM key with fewer than 1024 bits is that it weakens the domain's email authentication security, making it more susceptible to brute-force attacks. If an attacker successfully forges a DKIM signature, they can impersonate legitimate senders and send fraudulent or phishing emails that appear authentic to the recipient. This can lead to financial losses, reputational damage, and an increased risk of targeted attacks, as recipients are more likely to trust emails that pass DKIM verification.

Recommendation

We recommend using a DKIM key with a length of at least 1024 bits. Ideally, 2048-bit keys should be used, as they provide a higher level of security and are more resistant to brute-force attacks. Organizations should regularly audit their DKIM configurations and rotate cryptographic keys periodically to maintain security. In addition, any DKIM keys that are less than 1024 bits should be immediately replaced with stronger keys to prevent exploitation.

Evidence

Domain Queried	DNS Record Type	Description	Value
pourandsip.com	SPF	Sender Policy Framework	"v=spf1 mx a:pourandsip.com include:_spf.google.com include:shops.shopify.com include:mailgun.org include:sendgrid.net ~all"

Vulnerability description

We found that the Sender Policy Framework (SPF) record for the domain is configured with ~all (soft fail), which indicates that emails from unauthorized IP addresses are not explicitly denied. Instead, the recipient mail server is instructed to treat these messages with suspicion but may still accept them. This configuration may not provide enough protection against email spoofing and unauthorized email delivery, leaving the domain more vulnerable to impersonation attempts.

Risk description

The ~all directive in an SPF record allows unauthorized emails to pass through some email servers, even though they fail SPF verification. While such emails may be marked as suspicious or placed into a spam folder, not all mail servers handle soft fail conditions consistently. This creates a risk that malicious actors can spoof the domain to send phishing emails or other fraudulent communications, potentially causing damage to the organization's reputation and leading to successful social engineering attacks.

Recommendation

We recommend changing the SPF record's ~all (soft fail) directive to -all (hard fail). The -all setting tells recipient mail servers to reject emails from any IP addresses not listed in the SPF record, providing stronger protection against email spoofing. Ensure that all legitimate IP addresses and services that send emails on behalf of your domain are properly included in the SPF record before implementing this change.

Evidence

Software / Version	Category
Shopify	Ecommerce
PayPal	Payment processors
HSTS	Security
Cloudflare	CDN
HTTP/3	Miscellaneous
OWL Carousel	JavaScript libraries
jQuery	JavaScript libraries
Google Tag Manager	Tag managers
cdnjs	CDN
Affiliate Future	Affiliate programs

Vulnerability description

We noticed that server software and technology details are exposed, potentially aiding attackers in tailoring specific exploits against identified systems and versions.

Risk description

The risk is that an attacker could use this information to mount specific attacks against the identified software type and version.

Recommendation

We recommend you to eliminate the information which permits the identification of software platform, technology, server and operating system: HTTP server headers, HTML meta information, etc.

Operating System	Accuracy
FreeBSD 11.1-STABLE	91%

Evidence

Software / Version	Category
Cloudflare	CDN
HTTP/3	Miscellaneous

Vulnerability description

We noticed that server software and technology details are exposed, potentially aiding attackers in tailoring specific exploits against identified systems and versions.

Risk description

The risk is that an attacker could use this information to mount specific attacks against the identified software type and version.

Recommendation

We recommend you to eliminate the information which permits the identification of software platform, technology, server and operating system: HTTP server headers, HTML meta information, etc.

Evidence

Software / Version	Category
Cloudflare	CDN
HTTP/3	Miscellaneous

Vulnerability description

We noticed that server software and technology details are exposed, potentially aiding attackers in tailoring specific exploits against identified systems and versions.

Risk description

The risk is that an attacker could use this information to mount specific attacks against the identified software type and version.

Recommendation

We recommend you to eliminate the information which permits the identification of software platform, technology, server and operating system: HTTP server headers, HTML meta information, etc.

Evidence

Software / Version	Category
Cloudflare	CDN
HTTP/3	Miscellaneous

Vulnerability description

We noticed that server software and technology details are exposed, potentially aiding attackers in tailoring specific exploits against identified systems and versions.

Risk description

The risk is that an attacker could use this information to mount specific attacks against the identified software type and version.

Recommendation

We recommend you to eliminate the information which permits the identification of software platform, technology, server and operating system: HTTP server headers, HTML meta information, etc.

Evidence

Software / Version	Category
Cloudflare	CDN
HTTP/3	Miscellaneous

Vulnerability description

We noticed that server software and technology details are exposed, potentially aiding attackers in tailoring specific exploits against identified systems and versions.

Risk description

The risk is that an attacker could use this information to mount specific attacks against the identified software type and version.

Recommendation

We recommend you to eliminate the information which permits the identification of software platform, technology, server and operating system: HTTP server headers, HTML meta information, etc.

Evidence

Software / Version	Category
Cloudflare	CDN
HTTP/3	Miscellaneous

Vulnerability description

We noticed that server software and technology details are exposed, potentially aiding attackers in tailoring specific exploits against identified systems and versions.

Risk description

The risk is that an attacker could use this information to mount specific attacks against the identified software type and version.

Recommendation

We recommend you to eliminate the information which permits the identification of software platform, technology, server and operating system: HTTP server headers, HTML meta information, etc.

Evidence

Domain Queried	DNS Record Type	Description	Value
pourandsip.com	A	IPv4 address	23.227.38.65
pourandsip.com	NS	Name server	ns-1316.awsdns-36.org
pourandsip.com	NS	Name server	ns-166.awsdns-20.com
pourandsip.com	NS	Name server	ns-1890.awsdns-44.co.uk
pourandsip.com	NS	Name server	ns-961.awsdns-56.net
pourandsip.com	MX	Mail server	1 aspmx.l.google.com
pourandsip.com	MX	Mail server	10 alt3.aspmx.l.google.com
pourandsip.com	MX	Mail server	10 alt4.aspmx.l.google.com
pourandsip.com	MX	Mail server	5 alt1.aspmx.l.google.com
pourandsip.com	MX	Mail server	5 alt2.aspmx.l.google.com
pourandsip.com	SOA	Start of Authority	ns-1316.awsdns-36.org. awsdns-hostmaster.amazon.com. 1 7200 900 1209600 86400
pourandsip.com	TXT	Text record	"facebook-domain-verification=hswgce4hvu587qlypawjfrgqcwtva8"
pourandsip.com	TXT	Text record	"google-site-verification=mqSjnf5PVrPJDY0AY6v7lJavu_gVzY5y-QMrITnC6k8"
pourandsip.com	SPF	Sender Policy Framework	"v=spf1 mx a:pourandsip.com include:_spf.google.com include:shops.shopify.com include:mailgun.org include:sendgrid.net ~all"
_dmarc.pourandsip.com	TXT	Text record	"v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:andrew@atomsupplies.com; ruf=mailto:DMARC.report@atomsupplies.com; fo=0; adkim=r; aspf=s; rf=afrf; sp=reject"

Risk description

An initial step for an attacker aiming to learn about an organization involves conducting searches on its domain names to uncover DNS records associated with the organization. This strategy aims to amass comprehensive insights into the target domain, enabling the attacker to outline the organization's external digital landscape. This gathered intelligence may subsequently serve as a foundation for launching attacks, including those based on social engineering techniques. DNS records pointing to services or servers that are no longer in use can provide an attacker with an easy entry point into the network.

Recommendation

We recommend reviewing all DNS records associated with the domain and identifying and removing unused or obsolete records.

Evidence

Software / Version	Category
Cloudflare	CDN
HTTP/3	Miscellaneous

Vulnerability description

We noticed that server software and technology details are exposed, potentially aiding attackers in tailoring specific exploits against identified systems and versions.

Risk description

The risk is that an attacker could use this information to mount specific attacks against the identified software type and version.

Recommendation

We recommend you to eliminate the information which permits the identification of software platform, technology, server and operating system: HTTP server headers, HTML meta information, etc.

Evidence

DKIM selector	Key type	Key size	Value
google	rsa	726	"v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAk31daMKfVf7nv/MrceFX+5yQfY2X80RWu5tCtRSxkt2Gn8XtGrJ+wxAV6ybV2gXcIxmgKacvfoR4A" "TEftpgQ7/yV9SEpzByKpzI3oTctRncDBSLV8faqDnTXysbAkvPBx6dAUT+z8XdtA7jbaprOolbE7peGRTmOZIqA1fAehlEL90r4rib8oDNCbW7E6JZ7W73Q+FU/DqqQOjVpCscrFPc3YwybUn22yFz/Mnc9Zz7+XD+x+0L/gQMQ1Cr+UU1iUsnSiuDl44s2QHVMzse+50OoRvoA/uhmJrDB" "Z2Xl92zLeANfolZpkBzr7hPPtzCu3P1k4YN05sJM6/YTlbhsRwIDAQAB"
mailo	rsa	1296	"k=rsa; p=MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQD0Afa1vjGv8wyug360WvX9cnYG/oPdUXpEmZj+CF4cxZFsGVVuGYqlnfh0Qdys/ysiPzt1NdxAqjEynaHhLcNeAv6YxHBWUguCe2BRx2tAc+bpwzjm2c+B715JzF+7gJRnhfSrTNoTES4NW3T4WVrxFVmh+sCY3LwlheI6VweVhQIDAQAB"