Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | Home - How To Buy A Good Business |
| Description: | No description found |
| ip_address | 66.115.175.2 |
| country | US  |
| network_name | Performive LLC |
| asn | AS46562 |
25/tcp | smtp | - - |
53/tcp | domain | PowerDNS Authoritative Server 4.9.5 |
80/tcp | http | Apache httpd - |
443/tcp | https | Apache httpd - |
465/tcp | smtp | Exim smtpd 4.98.2 |
587/tcp | smtp | Exim smtpd 4.98.2 |
993/tcp | imap | Dovecot imapd - |
2078/tcp | https | cPanel httpd - |
2080/tcp | https | cPanel httpd - |
2082/tcp | http | - - |
2083/tcp | https | - - |
2086/tcp | http | - - |
2087/tcp | https | - - |
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Autoptimize 3.1.13 | WordPress plugins, Performance |
| Elementor 3.32.5 | Page builders, WordPress plugins |
| LazySizes | JavaScript libraries, Performance |
| jQuery Migrate 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| core-js 3.39.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Analytics GA4 | Analytics |
| Apache HTTP Server | Web servers |
| imagesLoaded 5.0.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery 3.7.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery UI 1.13.3 | JavaScript libraries |
| MySQL | Databases |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Select2 | JavaScript libraries |
| Site Kit 1.167.0 | Analytics, WordPress plugins |
| Stripe | Payment processors |
| Swiper | JavaScript libraries |
| Twitter Emoji (Twemoji) | Font scripts |
| Priority Hints | Performance |
| WooCommerce 10.3.3 | Ecommerce, WordPress plugins |
| WooCommerce Stripe Payment Gateway | WordPress plugins |
| WordPress 6.8.3 | CMS, Blogs |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| HSTS | Security |
| RSS | Miscellaneous |
| Yoast SEO | SEO, WordPress plugins |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
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://richardparker.com/ | Response headers do not include the X-Content-Type-Options HTTP security header |
Vulnerability description
We noticed that the target application's server responses lack the X-Content-Type-Options header. This header is particularly important for preventing Internet Explorer from reinterpreting the content of a web page (MIME-sniffing) and thus overriding the value of the Content-Type header.
Risk description
The risk is that lack of this header could make possible attacks such as Cross-Site Scripting or phishing in Internet Explorer browsers.
Recommendation
We recommend setting the X-Content-Type-Options header such as `X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff`.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-693 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://richardparker.com/ | Response headers do not include the Referrer-Policy HTTP security header as well as the |
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
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Autoptimize 3.1.13 | WordPress plugins, Performance |
| Elementor 3.32.5 | Page builders, WordPress plugins |
| LazySizes | JavaScript libraries, Performance |
| jQuery Migrate 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| core-js 3.39.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Analytics GA4 | Analytics |
| Apache HTTP Server | Web servers |
| imagesLoaded 5.0.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery 3.7.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery UI 1.13.3 | JavaScript libraries |
| MySQL | Databases |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Select2 | JavaScript libraries |
| Site Kit 1.167.0 | Analytics, WordPress plugins |
| Stripe | Payment processors |
| Swiper | JavaScript libraries |
| Twitter Emoji (Twemoji) | Font scripts |
| Priority Hints | Performance |
| WooCommerce 10.3.3 | Ecommerce, WordPress plugins |
| WooCommerce Stripe Payment Gateway | WordPress plugins |
| WordPress 6.8.3 | CMS, Blogs |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| HSTS | Security |
| RSS | Miscellaneous |
| Yoast SEO | SEO, WordPress plugins |
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://richardparker.com/ | 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 |
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://richardparker.com/wp-json/oembed/1.0/embed | GET | Query: url=https://richardparker.com/ 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 | Possible API endpoint found at |
Vulnerability description
We found API endpoints while crawling the given web application.
Risk description
These endpoints may represent an attack surface for malicious actors interested in API-specific vulnerabilities.
Recommendation
Use the API Scanner to perform a more thorough vulnerability check for these endpoints, if an API specification is present.
Evidence
| URL | Method | Parameters | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| https://richardparker.com/ | 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 | Email Address: support@richardparker.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
We found insecure DNS cookie usage on the following nameservers: ns69.worldnic.com, ns70.worldnic.com
Vulnerability description
We found that the server does not implement DNS Cookies or uses them insecurely. DNS Cookies help prevent DNS-based attacks, such as spoofing and amplification attacks.
Risk description
The risk exists because without DNS Cookies, the server is vulnerable to DNS spoofing and amplification attacks. Attackers can manipulate responses or use the server in distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, compromising network availability and security.
Recommendation
We recommend enabling DNS Cookies to prevent spoofed DNS responses. Ensure proper cookie validation is implemented to mitigate DNS amplification attacks. Regularly update DNS servers to support the latest DNS security features.
Evidence
We managed to detect that Exim smtpd has reached the End-of-Life (EOL).
Version detected: 4.98.2 End-of-life date: 2025-10-28 Latest version for the cycle: 4.98.2 This release cycle (4.98) doesn't have long-term-support (LTS). The cycle was released on 2024-07-10 and its latest release date was 2025-03-21.
Risk description
Using end-of-life (EOL) software poses significant security risks for organizations. EOL software no longer receives updates, including critical security patches. This creates a vulnerability landscape where known and potentially new security flaws remain unaddressed, making the software an attractive target for malicious actors. Attackers can exploit these vulnerabilities to gain unauthorized access, disrupt services, or steal sensitive data. Moreover, without updates, compatibility issues arise with newer technologies, leading to operational inefficiencies and increased potential for system failures. Additionally, regulatory and compliance risks accompany the use of EOL software. Many industries have strict data protection regulations that require up-to-date software to ensure the highest security standards. Non-compliance can result in hefty fines and legal consequences. Organizations also risk damaging their reputation if a breach occurs due to outdated software, eroding customer trust and potentially leading to a loss of business. Therefore, continuing to use EOL software undermines both security posture and business integrity, necessitating timely upgrades and proactive risk management strategies.
Recommendation
To mitigate the risks associated with end-of-life (EOL) software, it's crucial to take proactive steps. Start by identifying any EOL software currently in use within your organization. Once identified, prioritize upgrading or replacing these applications with supported versions that receive regular updates and security patches. This not only helps close security gaps but also ensures better compatibility with newer technologies, enhancing overall system efficiency and reliability.Additionally, develop a comprehensive software lifecycle management plan. This plan should include regular audits to identify upcoming EOL dates and a schedule for timely updates or replacements. Train your IT staff and users about the importance of keeping software up to date and the risks associated with using outdated versions. By maintaining a proactive approach to software management, you can significantly reduce security risks, ensure compliance with industry regulations, and protect your organization's reputation and customer trust.
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.richardparker.com | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:dmarc@richardparker.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc@richardparker.com; fo=1;" |
Vulnerability description
We found that the DMARC record for the domain is not configured with sp policy, meaning that no policy is enforced for subdomains. When a DMARC record does not include a subdomain policy (sp directive), subdomains are not explicitly covered by the main domain's DMARC policy. This means that emails sent from subdomains (e.g., sub.example.com) may not be subject to the same DMARC enforcement as the main domain (example.com). As a result, attackers could potentially spoof emails from subdomains without being blocked or flagged, even if the main domain has a strict DMARC policy.
Risk description
Without a subdomain policy (sp directive) in the DMARC record, subdomains are not protected by the same DMARC enforcement as the main domain, leaving them vulnerable to spoofing attacks. This inconsistency can be exploited by attackers to send phishing emails from subdomains, undermining the organization’s overall email security.
Recommendation
To mitigate the risk, we recommend configuring the DMARC record with a subdomain policy by adding the sp=reject or sp=quarantine directive. This will extend DMARC enforcement to all subdomains, preventing spoofing attempts and maintaining consistent security across both the main domain and its subdomains.
Evidence
We managed to detect that Exim smtpd has reached the End-of-Life (EOL).
Version detected: 4.98.2 End-of-life date: 2025-10-28 Latest version for the cycle: 4.98.2 This release cycle (4.98) doesn't have long-term-support (LTS). The cycle was released on 2024-07-10 and its latest release date was 2025-03-21.
Risk description
Using end-of-life (EOL) software poses significant security risks for organizations. EOL software no longer receives updates, including critical security patches. This creates a vulnerability landscape where known and potentially new security flaws remain unaddressed, making the software an attractive target for malicious actors. Attackers can exploit these vulnerabilities to gain unauthorized access, disrupt services, or steal sensitive data. Moreover, without updates, compatibility issues arise with newer technologies, leading to operational inefficiencies and increased potential for system failures. Additionally, regulatory and compliance risks accompany the use of EOL software. Many industries have strict data protection regulations that require up-to-date software to ensure the highest security standards. Non-compliance can result in hefty fines and legal consequences. Organizations also risk damaging their reputation if a breach occurs due to outdated software, eroding customer trust and potentially leading to a loss of business. Therefore, continuing to use EOL software undermines both security posture and business integrity, necessitating timely upgrades and proactive risk management strategies.
Recommendation
To mitigate the risks associated with end-of-life (EOL) software, it's crucial to take proactive steps. Start by identifying any EOL software currently in use within your organization. Once identified, prioritize upgrading or replacing these applications with supported versions that receive regular updates and security patches. This not only helps close security gaps but also ensures better compatibility with newer technologies, enhancing overall system efficiency and reliability.Additionally, develop a comprehensive software lifecycle management plan. This plan should include regular audits to identify upcoming EOL dates and a schedule for timely updates or replacements. Train your IT staff and users about the importance of keeping software up to date and the risks associated with using outdated versions. By maintaining a proactive approach to software management, you can significantly reduce security risks, ensure compliance with industry regulations, and protect your organization's reputation and customer trust.
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.richardparker.com | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:dmarc@richardparker.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc@richardparker.com; fo=1;" |
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
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| richardparker.com | A | IPv4 address | 66.115.175.2 |
| richardparker.com | NS | Name server | ns69.worldnic.com |
| richardparker.com | NS | Name server | ns70.worldnic.com |
| richardparker.com | MX | Mail server | 0 richardparker-com.mail.protection.outlook.com |
| richardparker.com | SOA | Start of Authority | NS69.WORLDNIC.com. namehost.WORLDNIC.com. 124090912 10800 3600 604800 3600 |
| richardparker.com | TXT | Text record | "MS=ms23528797" |
| richardparker.com | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 include:spf.protection.outlook.com -all" |
| _dmarc.richardparker.com | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:dmarc@richardparker.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc@richardparker.com; fo=1;" |
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
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| richardparker.com | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 include:spf.protection.outlook.com -all" |
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| WordPress 6.8.3 | CMS, Blogs |
| MySQL | Databases |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Apache HTTP Server | Web servers |
| WooCommerce 10.3.3 | Ecommerce, WordPress plugins |
| Elementor 3.32.5 | Page builders, WordPress plugins |
| Site Kit 1.167.0 | Analytics, WordPress plugins |
| Autoptimize 3.1.13 | WordPress plugins, Performance |
| Swiper | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery Migrate 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery | JavaScript libraries |
| imagesLoaded 5.0.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Google Analytics GA4 | Analytics |
| HSTS | Security |
| Yoast SEO | SEO, WordPress plugins |
| Priority Hints | Performance |
| RSS | Miscellaneous |
| Open Graph | 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 |
|---|---|
| cPanel | Hosting panels |
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 |
|---|---|
| Basic | Security |
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
| Operating System | Accuracy |
|---|---|
| Linux 2.6.32 | 94% |
Vulnerability description
OS Detection
Evidence
| DKIM selector | Key type | Key size | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| s1 | rsa | 1446 | "k=rsa; t=s; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAyP5mnGkmqU8RsKPyGbs35Te8MfmJbd7PaVytAnfrsbzwsfbL8UatoFfUjWyRCFk2Upy3c68EvcCN3BBM9BpDc52X1+4iPYBIhTHaaAbwZf/3D/dZBL3TdJ+1Nze/zps829/p0xINoEG3ig42Q/vh7r8u4Y+/JWOW86X63fkTXC6v+MMOZIpBvP+yHnDnd2gUCJ6iM" "bjJEUnx5XokmXzK6+slPJ/8fhtzO1/2CEedEcY9nUatvCFHADTHhjL49MbRvz623GsV5IZf2gc+F8sksMwlEdtXO0wYUS66K51lx+qLdaHHPfP9hly1r598SWxYA0u2tC14IM/0FsqczkuR6wIDAQAB" |
| s2 | rsa | 1446 | "k=rsa; t=s; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAuTMuNhjLu3+N9SPn04m/83zfw3tzHpWIM8Fsn8T+4/v6/zHQOSwDJm1KBNFsH8CUQjL6PRkznZGl92vgnDAsxgQ13b0nAQg25d+MN7tVKhPD9MasW7EGASrPEZGYehM5fnYlfxKdF6ImE302nb34Td5yAyf1YRCiKvVo8G/FqzvzZunszOMlvC/8K5pLL9lei7BAq" "gPS4jgVpU5SCjgCjvxmTBW12789KD8MLFjr14OYhTRwNFZfbRwzLz/U0MsPycnyRlQj+IyX84O65v5H2Dt0etDsL8buA6i1yaxHsD96uXg7IlYnOS93ObEx6B0cwsOshtb1RiZXfehu58pD5wIDAQAB" |
| selector1 | rsa | 1422 | "v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAmZCWMBmB5WIdk65xqLa87r85cFbiO7SC60xuHbtPtbQ9KevR+ACz2KYIACptWFc3ttiQv/MVO10iC5I2sL//EiraYdWh5uEIZgFjgvr3fDQWyGbJ+q27h2gX9XRbWEmHNy9SqBAJkpWFm8QcJ/Qhq9a6vkulmYmw3vpsz7nocSN/SSH48skZZ/C0iRigLDSPW" "LKx8g/ztaqCll1/z2h3CWsiiXdbSPDDMVLoNoRPnJUmGKjcCPtqfRROcRGyUXSM0uWtU3rbXzd0+We2biexJocYLePT7oRgU9Lm9P2UvGPz/22qX8iAuVW5kv3VnFQfoCuzWtr71GdcExbFnBZ93QIDAQAB;" |
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Basic | Security |
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.