Vulnerability Scan Result

Target:

https://notes.io/wSLxW

Scanned target: https://notes.io/wSLxW

Submitted: May 28, 2025 from LB

Public Scan

Scan mode: Passive (non-intrusive)

Summary

high

Info

Low

Medium

High

Critical

Screenshot

Title:	biaya produksi kolam renang serta \| Notes
Description:	biaya produksi kolam renang serta ecek-ecek rab sederhana bakal melecehkan simulasi perkiraan harga, kita ibaratkan tenaga kolam renang adalah 1, 2 meter. buat mengestimasi harga kolam renang 3x6, ada dua langkah yang diharuskan. tidak cuma itu, saya pun : Notes

IP Information

IP address	188.114.96.7
Country	-
AS number	AS13335
Net name	Cloudflare Inc

IP address	188.114.97.7
Country	-
AS number	AS13335
Net name	Cloudflare Inc

Open Ports

2082/tcp	http	Cloudflare http proxy -
2083/tcp	https	nginx -
2086/tcp	http	Cloudflare http proxy -
2087/tcp	https	nginx -

Web Technologies

Software / Version	Category
Google Analytics GA4	Analytics
HTTP/3	Miscellaneous
jQuery 1.12.4	JavaScript libraries
Open Graph	Miscellaneous
PHP	Programming languages
Cloudflare Rocket Loader	Performance
Cloudflare	CDN
Google AdSense	Advertising
Google Tag Manager	Tag managers
HSTS	Security

Web Application Vulnerabilities

Evidence

CVSS	CVE	Summary	Affected software
4.3	CVE-2015-9251	jQuery before 3.0.0 is vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) attacks when a cross-domain Ajax request is performed without the dataType option, causing text/javascript responses to be executed.	jquery 1.12.4
4.3	CVE-2019-11358	jQuery before 3.4.0, as used in Drupal, Backdrop CMS, and other products, mishandles jQuery.extend(true, {}, ...) because of Object.prototype pollution. If an unsanitized source object contained an enumerable __proto__ property, it could extend the native Object.prototype.	jquery 1.12.4
4.3	CVE-2020-11023	In jQuery versions greater than or equal to 1.0.3 and before 3.5.0, passing HTML containing <option> elements from untrusted sources - even after sanitizing it - to one of jQuery's DOM manipulation methods (i.e. .html(), .append(), and others) may execute untrusted code. This problem is patched in jQuery 3.5.0.	jquery 1.12.4
4.3	CVE-2020-11022	In jQuery versions greater than or equal to 1.2 and before 3.5.0, passing HTML from untrusted sources - even after sanitizing it - to one of jQuery's DOM manipulation methods (i.e. .html(), .append(), and others) may execute untrusted code. This problem is patched in jQuery 3.5.0.	jquery 1.12.4

Vulnerability description

We noticed known vulnerabilities in the target application based on the server responses. They are usually related to outdated systems and expose the affected applications to the risk of unauthorized access to confidential data and possibly denial of service attacks. Depending on the system distribution the affected software can be patched but displays the same version, requiring manual checking.

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-1026
OWASP Top 10 - 2017	A9 - Using Components with Known Vulnerabilities
OWASP Top 10 - 2021	A6 - Vulnerable and Outdated Components

Evidence

URL	Cookie Name	Evidence
https://notes.io/wSLxW	PHPSESSID	Set-Cookie: PHPSESSID=e49fbffb3bddc9123468d05eaacb2da6

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	A6 - Security Misconfiguration
OWASP Top 10 - 2021	A5 - Security Misconfiguration

Evidence

URL	Cookie Name	Evidence
https://notes.io/wSLxW	PHPSESSID	The server responded with Set-Cookie header(s) that does not specify the HttpOnly flag: Set-Cookie: PHPSESSID=e49fbffb3bddc9123468d05eaacb2da6

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	A6 - Security Misconfiguration
OWASP Top 10 - 2021	A5 - Security Misconfiguration

Evidence

URL	Evidence
https://notes.io/wSLxW	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	A6 - Security Misconfiguration
OWASP Top 10 - 2021	A5 - Security Misconfiguration

Evidence

URL	Evidence
https://notes.io/wSLxW	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	A6 - Security Misconfiguration
OWASP Top 10 - 2021	A5 - Security Misconfiguration

Evidence

URL	Evidence
https://notes.io/wSLxW	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	A6 - Security Misconfiguration
OWASP Top 10 - 2021	A5 - Security Misconfiguration

Evidence

Software / Version	Category
Google Analytics GA4	Analytics
HTTP/3	Miscellaneous
jQuery 1.12.4	JavaScript libraries
Open Graph	Miscellaneous
PHP	Programming languages
Cloudflare Rocket Loader	Performance
Cloudflare	CDN
Google AdSense	Advertising
Google Tag Manager	Tag managers
HSTS	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.

Classification

OWASP Top 10 - 2017	A6 - Security Misconfiguration
OWASP Top 10 - 2021	A5 - Security Misconfiguration

Evidence

URL
https://notes.io/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).

Classification

OWASP Top 10 - 2017	A6 - Security Misconfiguration
OWASP Top 10 - 2021	A5 - Security Misconfiguration

Infrastructure Vulnerabilities

Evidence

Domain Queried	DNS Record Type	Description	Value
notes.io	SPF	Sender Policy Framework	"v=spf1 include:_spf.google.com ~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

Domain Queried	DNS Record Type	Description	Value
_dmarc.notes.io	TXT	Text record	"v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:notes@notes.io"

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

Domain Queried	DNS Record Type	Description	Value
_dmarc.notes.io	TXT	Text record	"v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:notes@notes.io"

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
notes.io	A	IPv4 address	188.114.96.7
notes.io	A	IPv4 address	188.114.97.7
notes.io	NS	Name server	bill.ns.cloudflare.com
notes.io	NS	Name server	irena.ns.cloudflare.com
notes.io	MX	Mail server	10 aspmx.l.google.com
notes.io	MX	Mail server	20 alt1.aspmx.l.google.com
notes.io	MX	Mail server	20 alt2.aspmx.l.google.com
notes.io	MX	Mail server	30 aspmx2.googlemail.com
notes.io	MX	Mail server	30 aspmx3.googlemail.com
notes.io	MX	Mail server	30 aspmx4.googlemail.com
notes.io	MX	Mail server	30 aspmx5.googlemail.com
notes.io	SOA	Start of Authority	bill.ns.cloudflare.com. dns.cloudflare.com. 2373405666 10000 2400 604800 1800
notes.io	AAAA	IPv6 address	2a06:98c1:3121::7
notes.io	AAAA	IPv6 address	2a06:98c1:3120::7
notes.io	TXT	Text record	"google-site-verification=DKc3dEzX_PMdx649Pm4EMBwXFtAwZtKCHDZqvxXg-ck"
notes.io	SPF	Sender Policy Framework	"v=spf1 include:_spf.google.com ~all"
notes.io	CAA	Certificate Authority Authorization	0 issue "comodoca.com"
notes.io	CAA	Certificate Authority Authorization	0 issue "digicert.com; cansignhttpexchanges=yes"
notes.io	CAA	Certificate Authority Authorization	0 issue "letsencrypt.org"
notes.io	CAA	Certificate Authority Authorization	0 issue "pki.goog; cansignhttpexchanges=yes"
notes.io	CAA	Certificate Authority Authorization	0 issue "ssl.com"
notes.io	CAA	Certificate Authority Authorization	0 issuewild "comodoca.com"
notes.io	CAA	Certificate Authority Authorization	0 issuewild "digicert.com; cansignhttpexchanges=yes"
notes.io	CAA	Certificate Authority Authorization	0 issuewild "letsencrypt.org"
notes.io	CAA	Certificate Authority Authorization	0 issuewild "pki.goog; cansignhttpexchanges=yes"
notes.io	CAA	Certificate Authority Authorization	0 issuewild "ssl.com"
_dmarc.notes.io	TXT	Text record	"v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:notes@notes.io"

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.

Operating System	Accuracy
FreeBSD 11.0-RELEASE	91%

Evidence

DKIM selector	Key type	Key size	Value
google	rsa	1422	"v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEA5+gC7VP3xzprmrAMvLITjioC1sUV+Teh17hNq4CnDVr5v2iebHOy92cbumIz7fX5ciXhmJa3b813ADg7vheifPnReKtD1HOhiXgJr5MmGoXiFLTwXDNIQRpZh92BIc0decDMG1mfEuQrnOzo+0M3DVhGWmVqdsVbE2j11qzneAKucXW10znXgKdNU/NKfUWAR" "MXVPb/99+8kop9Dx2PF0XeRD2Kl/l/G681sfFiSGb6LGavZhxqHOYJAZsE79QSiJ+P9TYhD9OYFzZiFjODi+KuLiYcuW4JcCGFq3iMTzzPsswhF+lRqUPEEbgUOTcz75I45/ZR8IkGRe1hQhZFFTQIDAQAB"

Evidence

Software / Version	Category
PHP	Programming languages
Google Analytics	Analytics
HSTS	Security
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
PHP	Programming languages
Google AdSense	Advertising
jQuery	JavaScript libraries
Google Tag Manager	Tag managers
Google Analytics GA4	Analytics
Cloudflare Browser Insights	Analytics, RUM
HSTS	Security
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.