Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | Würth Start |
| Description: | No description found |
| ip_address | 62.225.131.109 |
| country | DE  |
| network_name | Deutsche Telekom AG |
| asn | AS3320 |
80/tcp | http | - - |
443/tcp | https | - - |
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Inertia.js | JavaScript frameworks |
| Marko | Web frameworks, UI frameworks |
| Node.js | Programming languages |
| Sectigo | SSL/TLS certificate authorities |
| PWA | Miscellaneous |
| Algolia | Search engines |
| HSTS | Security |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| URL | Cookie Name | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| https://wtsonline.wuerth.com/ | wurth_technical_software_online_session, TS01863420 | Set-Cookie: wurth_technical_software_online_session=eyJpdiI6IjFTVndObUZhM2FwdTllRnplK0kwTVE9PSIsInZhbHVlIjoib2Rmd2YvTjd5M3B0clQwd1Rad1VKbE5DZzRJZWN5UW4wNjZKVnJTRVUyTDlvTk9rZklaUHh5WmIzdkJiUE05VHNtMS8rWWMrQWtSeHR5b1hwV1Q3Q2RsRFZnOUVWT2ZLV0kwczNUMnNxZndnb0sxTjBkQlB6VkM3MW8zT3hNa2UiLCJtYWMiOiI0YzMwMDgxYjAyYzZkZDJlODcxZWYzNmZlODViYThmODVjN2UwOTI1OTA5MzYyYzNkZWEwMjE0ZWVhMDA3OTllIiwidGFnIjoiIn0%3D Set-Cookie: TS01863420=015b4a20ea6e0c25580bf42a019d98b78948d0480ba19b9ad898ef5a2676bd6ac463e9665f146bb499140c9355ba39bdc3a12301312e014a84a51dee870d08cb6b6a536a7ede307870406ac2c2db041a8f2a313ab4 |
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://wtsonline.wuerth.com/ | TS01863420 | The server responded with Set-Cookie header(s) that does not specify the HttpOnly flag: Set-Cookie: TS01863420=015b4a20ea6e0c25580bf42a019d98b78948d0480ba19b9ad898ef5a2676bd6ac463e9665f146bb499140c9355ba39bdc3a12301312e014a84a51dee870d08cb6b6a536a7ede307870406ac2c2db041a8f2a313ab4 |
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
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://wtsonline.wuerth.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 |
Evidence
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://wtsonline.wuerth.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
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://wtsonline.wuerth.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
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Inertia.js | JavaScript frameworks |
| Marko | Web frameworks, UI frameworks |
| Node.js | Programming languages |
| Sectigo | SSL/TLS certificate authorities |
| PWA | Miscellaneous |
| Algolia | Search engines |
| 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.
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).
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 | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| https://wtsonline.wuerth.com/ | OPTIONS | We did a HTTP OPTIONS request. The server responded with a 200 status code and the header: `Allow: OPTIONS, TRACE, GET, HEAD, POST` Request / Response |
Vulnerability description
We have noticed that the webserver responded with an Allow HTTP header when an OPTIONS HTTP request was sent. This method responds to requests by providing information about the methods available for the target resource.
Risk description
The only risk this might present nowadays is revealing debug HTTP methods that can be used on the server. This can present a danger if any of those methods can lead to sensitive information, like authentication information, secret keys.
Recommendation
We recommend that you check for unused HTTP methods or even better, disable the OPTIONS method. This can be done using your webserver configuration.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-16 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Infrastructure Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Algolia | Search engines |
| Node.js | Programming languages |
| Marko | Web frameworks, UI frameworks |
| Inertia.js | JavaScript frameworks |
| Lodash 4.17.21 | JavaScript libraries |
| Sectigo | SSL/TLS certificate authorities |
| HSTS | Security |
| Webpack | Miscellaneous |
| PWA | 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 |
|---|---|
| Algolia | Search engines |
| Node.js | Programming languages |
| Marko | Web frameworks, UI frameworks |
| Inertia.js | JavaScript frameworks |
| Sectigo | SSL/TLS certificate authorities |
| 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.
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| wtsonline.wuerth.com | A | IPv4 address | 62.225.131.109 |
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.