Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | inlead | Criação de quiz interativo e funis dinâmicos |
| Description: | No description found |
| ip_address | 104.26.14.6 |
| country | - |
| network_name | Cloudflare, Inc. |
| asn | AS13335 |
| ip_address | 104.26.15.6 |
| country | - |
| network_name | Cloudflare, Inc. |
| asn | AS13335 |
| ip_address | 172.67.71.80 |
| country | - |
| network_name | Cloudflare, Inc. |
| asn | AS13335 |
80/tcp | http | Cloudflare http proxy - |
443/tcp | https | cloudflare - |
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-alt | cloudflare - |
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Amazon Web Services | PaaS |
| Microsoft Clarity | Analytics |
| Facebook Pixel 2.9.338 | Analytics |
| core-js 3.32.2 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Analytics | Analytics |
| Lucide | Font scripts |
| Framer Motion | JavaScript libraries |
| MySQL | Databases |
| Next.js 15.5.13 | JavaScript frameworks, Web frameworks, Web servers, Static site generator |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| React | JavaScript frameworks |
| DoubleClick Floodlight | Advertising |
| Swiper | JavaScript libraries |
| Vercel | PaaS |
| Webpack | Miscellaneous |
| WordPress | CMS, Blogs |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| HSTS | Security |
| YouTube | Video players |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-44578 | 8.6 | 0.02829 | 0.84774 | Next.js is a React framework for building full-stack web applications. From 13.4.13 to before 15.5.16 and 16.2.5, self-hosted applications using the built-in Node.js server can be vulnerable to server-side request forgery through crafted WebSocket upgrade requests. An attacker can cause the server to proxy requests to arbitrary internal or external destinations, which may expose internal services or cloud metadata endpoints. Vercel-hosted deployments are not affected. This vulnerability is fixed in 15.5.16 and 16.2.5. |
| CVE-2026-45109 | 7.5 | 0.00386 | 0.30185 | Next.js is a React framework for building full-stack web applications. From 15.2.0 to before 15.5.18 and 16.2.6, it was found that the fix addressing CVE-2026-44575 did not apply to middleware.ts with Turbopack. This vulnerability is fixed in 15.5.18 and 16.2.6. |
| CVE-2026-44579 | 7.5 | 0.00461 | 0.36414 | Next.js is a React framework for building full-stack web applications. From to before 15.5.16 and 16.2.5, applications using Partial Prerendering through the Cache Components feature can be vulnerable to connection exhaustion through crafted POST requests to a server action. In affected configurations, a malicious request can trigger a request-body handling deadlock that leaves connections open for an extended period, consuming file descriptors and server capacity until legitimate users are denied service. This vulnerability is fixed in 15.5.16 and 16.2.5. |
| CVE-2026-44580 | 6.1 | 0.00205 | 0.10419 | Next.js is a React framework for building full-stack web applications. From 13.0.0 to before 15.5.16 and 16.2.5, applications that use beforeInteractive scripts together with untrusted content can be vulnerable to cross-site scripting. In affected versions, serialized script content was not escaped safely before being embedded into the document, which could allow attacker-controlled input to break out of the intended script context and execute arbitrary JavaScript in a visitor's browser. This vulnerability is fixed in 15.5.16 and 16.2.5. |
| CVE-2026-44576 | 5.4 | 0.00241 | 0.14961 | Next.js is a React framework for building full-stack web applications. From 14.2.0 to before 15.5.16 and 16.2.5, applications using React Server Components can be vulnerable to cache poisoning when shared caches do not correctly partition response variants. Under affected conditions, an attacker can cause an RSC response to be served from the original URL and poison shared cache entries so later visitors receive component payloads instead of the expected HTML. This vulnerability is fixed in 15.5.16 and 16.2.5. |
Vulnerability description
Outdated or vulnerable software components include versions of server-side software that are no longer supported or have known, publicly disclosed vulnerabilities. Using outdated software significantly increases the attack surface of a system and may allow unauthorized access, data leaks, or service disruptions. Vulnerabilities in these components are often well-documented and actively exploited by attackers. Without security patches or vendor support, any weaknesses remain unmitigated, exposing the application to risks. In some cases, even after patching, the reported version may remain unchanged, requiring manual verification.
Risk description
The risk is that an attacker could search for an appropriate exploit (or create one himself) for any of these vulnerabilities and use it to attack the system. Since the vulnerabilities were discovered using only version-based testing, the risk level for this finding will not exceed 'high' severity. Critical risks will be assigned to vulnerabilities identified through accurate active testing methods.
Recommendation
In order to eliminate the risk of these vulnerabilities, we recommend you check the installed software version and upgrade to the latest version.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-1035 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
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://inlead.digital/ | 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-1021 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://inlead.digital/ | 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
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Amazon Web Services | PaaS |
| Microsoft Clarity | Analytics |
| Facebook Pixel 2.9.338 | Analytics |
| core-js 3.32.2 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Analytics | Analytics |
| Lucide | Font scripts |
| Framer Motion | JavaScript libraries |
| MySQL | Databases |
| Next.js 15.5.13 | JavaScript frameworks, Web frameworks, Web servers, Static site generator |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| React | JavaScript frameworks |
| DoubleClick Floodlight | Advertising |
| Swiper | JavaScript libraries |
| Vercel | PaaS |
| Webpack | Miscellaneous |
| WordPress | CMS, Blogs |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| HSTS | Security |
| YouTube | Video players |
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.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-200 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| URL | Method | Parameters | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| https://inlead.digital/comunicados/politica-de-privacidade | 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: u003ejuridico@inlead.digital |
| https://inlead.digital/contato | 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: contato@inlead.digital juridico@inlead.digital |
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 |
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.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-1188 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Infrastructure Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | CISA KEV | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-44578 | 8.6 | 0.02829 | 0.84774 | No | Next.js is a React framework for building full-stack web applications. From 13.4.13 to before 15.5.16 and 16.2.5, self-hosted applications using the built-in Node.js server can be vulnerable to server-side request forgery through crafted WebSocket upgrade requests. An attacker can cause the server to proxy requests to arbitrary internal or external destinations, which may expose internal services or cloud metadata endpoints. Vercel-hosted deployments are not affected. This vulnerability is fixed in 15.5.16 and 16.2.5. |
| CVE-2026-45109 | 7.5 | 0.00386 | 0.30185 | No | Next.js is a React framework for building full-stack web applications. From 15.2.0 to before 15.5.18 and 16.2.6, it was found that the fix addressing CVE-2026-44575 did not apply to middleware.ts with Turbopack. This vulnerability is fixed in 15.5.18 and 16.2.6. |
| CVE-2026-44579 | 7.5 | 0.00461 | 0.36414 | No | Next.js is a React framework for building full-stack web applications. From to before 15.5.16 and 16.2.5, applications using Partial Prerendering through the Cache Components feature can be vulnerable to connection exhaustion through crafted POST requests to a server action. In affected configurations, a malicious request can trigger a request-body handling deadlock that leaves connections open for an extended period, consuming file descriptors and server capacity until legitimate users are denied service. This vulnerability is fixed in 15.5.16 and 16.2.5. |
| CVE-2026-44580 | 6.1 | 0.00205 | 0.10419 | No | Next.js is a React framework for building full-stack web applications. From 13.0.0 to before 15.5.16 and 16.2.5, applications that use beforeInteractive scripts together with untrusted content can be vulnerable to cross-site scripting. In affected versions, serialized script content was not escaped safely before being embedded into the document, which could allow attacker-controlled input to break out of the intended script context and execute arbitrary JavaScript in a visitor's browser. This vulnerability is fixed in 15.5.16 and 16.2.5. |
| CVE-2026-44576 | 5.4 | 0.00241 | 0.14961 | No | Next.js is a React framework for building full-stack web applications. From 14.2.0 to before 15.5.16 and 16.2.5, applications using React Server Components can be vulnerable to cache poisoning when shared caches do not correctly partition response variants. Under affected conditions, an attacker can cause an RSC response to be served from the original URL and poison shared cache entries so later visitors receive component payloads instead of the expected HTML. This vulnerability is fixed in 15.5.16 and 16.2.5. |
Vulnerability description
Vulnerabilities found for Next.js 15.5.13
Risk description
These vulnerabilities expose the affected applications to the risk of unauthorized access to confidential data and possibly to denial of service attacks. An attacker could search for an appropriate exploit (or create one) for any of these vulnerabilities and use it to attack the system. Notes: - The vulnerabilities are identified based on the server's version.; - Only the first 5 vulnerabilities with the highest risk are shown for each port.; Since the vulnerabilities were discovered using only version-based testing, the risk level for this finding will not exceed "high" severity. Critical risks will be assigned to vulnerabilities identified through accurate active testing methods.
Recommendation
We recommend you to upgrade the affected software to the latest version in order to eliminate the risks imposed by these vulnerabilities.
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.inlead.digital | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:0acf4a89ec544e23bedf818611bebaf1@dmarc-reports.cloudflare.net" |
Vulnerability description
We found that the DMARC record for the domain is not configured with ruf tag. A missing ruf (forensic reporting) tag in a DMARC record indicates that the domain owner has not enabled the collection of detailed failure reports. Forensic reports provide valuable insights into specific instances where emails fail DMARC authentication. Without the ruf tag, the domain administrator loses the ability to receive and analyze these reports, making it difficult to investigate individual email failures or identify targeted phishing or spoofing attacks that may be exploiting weaknesses in the email authentication setup.
Risk description
Without forensic reports (ruf), domain owners have limited visibility into the specifics of failed DMARC validation. This means potential malicious activity, such as email spoofing or phishing attempts, might go unnoticed until they result in more significant security breaches or reputational damage. Forensic reports allow for quick response to email abuses by providing detailed information about the failure, including the header information of the emails involved. The absence of this data hampers an organization's ability to identify and mitigate threats targeting its domain, increasing the risk of ongoing spoofing and fraud.
Recommendation
We recommend configuring the ruf tag in the DMARC record. This tag specifies where forensic reports should be sent, providing the domain owner with detailed data on DMARC validation failures. Forensic reports allow administrators to analyze why certain emails failed authentication, making it easier to fine-tune DMARC policies or address potential vulnerabilities. Ensure that the ruf email address belongs to a secure and trusted location capable of handling sensitive email data.
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.inlead.digital | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:0acf4a89ec544e23bedf818611bebaf1@dmarc-reports.cloudflare.net" |
Vulnerability description
We found that the target uses p=none in the DMARC policy. The DMARC policy set to p=none means that the domain owner is not taking any action on emails that fail DMARC validation. This configuration effectively disables enforcement, allowing potentially spoofed or fraudulent emails to be delivered without any additional scrutiny.
Risk description
Emails that fail DMARC checks are still delivered to recipients. This leaves the domain highly vulnerable to email spoofing and phishing attacks, as malicious actors can impersonate the domain without facing any consequences from DMARC enforcement.
Recommendation
We recommend changing the DMARC policy to p=quarantine or, ideally, p=reject to actively block or quarantine emails that fail DMARC validation. This will enhance the security of your domain against spoofing and phishing attacks by ensuring that only legitimate emails are delivered.
Evidence
We found insecure DNS cookie usage on the following nameservers: mia.ns.cloudflare.com, alex.ns.cloudflare.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
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.inlead.digital | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:0acf4a89ec544e23bedf818611bebaf1@dmarc-reports.cloudflare.net" |
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
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Cloudflare | CDN |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| inlead.digital | A | IPv4 address | 104.26.14.6 |
| inlead.digital | A | IPv4 address | 104.26.15.6 |
| inlead.digital | A | IPv4 address | 172.67.71.80 |
| inlead.digital | NS | Name server | mia.ns.cloudflare.com |
| inlead.digital | NS | Name server | alex.ns.cloudflare.com |
| inlead.digital | MX | Mail server | 10 mx.zoho.com |
| inlead.digital | MX | Mail server | 20 mx2.zoho.com |
| inlead.digital | MX | Mail server | 50 mx3.zoho.com |
| inlead.digital | SOA | Start of Authority | alex.ns.cloudflare.com. dns.cloudflare.com. 2407121069 10000 2400 604800 1800 |
| inlead.digital | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2606:4700:20::681a:e06 |
| inlead.digital | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2606:4700:20::681a:f06 |
| inlead.digital | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2606:4700:20::ac43:4750 |
| inlead.digital | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=TB296IKaj2HjSl5k6ej2s6M9sUzciQ8st1FPPD4EiXU" |
| inlead.digital | TXT | Text record | "stripe-verification=FF27450DCE288CB1B5A941DEDAFBCF7742F13730489D425A1F9E7B8B39FBC3C2" |
| inlead.digital | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 include:zohomail.com include:123456.spf03.hubspotemail.net -all" |
| inlead.digital | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "comodoca.com" |
| inlead.digital | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "digicert.com; cansignhttpexchanges=yes" |
| inlead.digital | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "letsencrypt.org" |
| inlead.digital | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "pki.goog; cansignhttpexchanges=yes" |
| inlead.digital | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "ssl.com" |
| inlead.digital | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issuewild "comodoca.com" |
| inlead.digital | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issuewild "digicert.com; cansignhttpexchanges=yes" |
| inlead.digital | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issuewild "letsencrypt.org" |
| inlead.digital | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issuewild "pki.goog; cansignhttpexchanges=yes" |
| inlead.digital | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issuewild "ssl.com" |
| _dmarc.inlead.digital | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:0acf4a89ec544e23bedf818611bebaf1@dmarc-reports.cloudflare.net" |
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 |
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 |
|---|---|
| FreeBSD 11.1-STABLE | 91% |
Vulnerability description
OS Detection
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Cloudflare | CDN |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| s1 | rsa | 1446 | "k=rsa; t=s; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAuH5XGsMTsm+hl9lRcAgoaJL0TiG6/uNJo3toI1Cuhav25rrZQGJVgB2L0bBA7ylmoEhX9dfmrxtKo4EuyWQ68oU80Fl+5k7eF7EjzqRUrfZVaix50wVcfRXTGRbyOC3A9JVsyYdMxWgFibvfQu3EwRCsC9BpwJCh7kbyQroi9xvKP0ryp3F0g+lzb6hlv10vhNXq1" "E10R+T453jUbCFcip6p0dNa3v5jE7d1yrclvLo4dyiS3JsOQXO0E6GxN7u8ELo9khdz6XjH5z6Ixb2N7Y2YTbjhsIcRqrmb9ZXx9JUBwttAM0w3EQuCdQ+kew9xWvWmX/2BXi60l50R+fLh4wIDAQAB" |
| s2 | rsa | 1446 | "k=rsa; t=s; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAn9B8HppPozBOuzibJA6R4mfL6rfx5XnZB6j6e+6Yap43MtwDDda8pslYIWedcbFOPW1j/RIB6/bTcmsc+m4wu01ZrqIllc9/YVfTUyTHqwmb6Zw9x4ZF0yGjczsO2ZDan5S5i1hYiuMrAMVaLRKnmj5IgaXCZz27uVIhUKPTWGLIuYnUNCHID8K8G6VMv3S2DQDdz" "27BOHEFJ/yyUeMmFaQrXLzYnWQoLeFHImVPCSPHBPLmd1nszEi3zBtpzDDOav0skabcRWTiSEKlru10el+TwafO14bYYniu1+E7J58xNFDX11BpRpQpJ1rz8/w2TeBVMtf5wYNXp00p581q8wIDAQAB" |
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| WordPress | CMS, Blogs |
| Next.js 15.5.13 | JavaScript frameworks, Web frameworks, Web servers, Static site generator |
| MySQL | Databases |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| YouTube | Video players |
| React | JavaScript frameworks |
| Amazon Web Services | PaaS |
| Vercel | PaaS |
| Swiper | JavaScript libraries |
| Microsoft Clarity | Analytics |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Google Analytics | Analytics |
| Facebook Pixel 2.9.338 | Analytics |
| core-js 3.32.2 | JavaScript libraries |
| Lucide | Font scripts |
| DoubleClick Floodlight | Advertising |
| Cloudflare Browser Insights | Analytics, RUM |
| Framer Motion | JavaScript libraries |
| HSTS | Security |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| Webpack | 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
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| inlead.digital | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 include:zohomail.com include:123456.spf03.hubspotemail.net -all" |