Vulnerability Scan Result

Target:

https://lisaccount.com/ (redirect)

Scanned target: https://www.lisaccount.com/

Submitted: Jun 14, 2025 from BN

Public Scan

Scan mode: Passive (non-intrusive)

Summary

low

Info

Low

Medium

High

Critical

Screenshot

Title:	HOME
Description:	Bons Vivant

IP Information

ip_address	185.146.22.230
country	US
network_name	-
asn	-

Open Ports

21/tcp	ftp	Pure-FTPd -
25/tcp	smtp	Exim smtpd 4.98.1
80/tcp	http	LiteSpeed -
110/tcp	pop3	Dovecot pop3d -
143/tcp	imap	Dovecot imapd -
443/tcp	https	LiteSpeed -
465/tcp	smtp	Exim smtpd 4.98.1
587/tcp	smtp	Exim smtpd 4.98.1
993/tcp	imap	Dovecot imapd -
995/tcp	pop3	Dovecot pop3d -
2078/tcp	https	cPanel httpd -
2080/tcp	https	TwistedWeb httpd 9.0.0
2082/tcp	http	- -
2083/tcp	https	- -
2086/tcp	http	- -
2087/tcp	https	- -

Web Technologies

Software / Version	Category
Animate.css	UI frameworks
Calendly	Appointment scheduling
Clipboard.js	JavaScript libraries
Contact Form 7	WordPress plugins, Form builders
jQuery Migrate 3.4.1	JavaScript libraries
AddToAny Share Buttons	WordPress plugins
core-js 3.39.0	JavaScript libraries
Google Font API	Font scripts
GSAP	JavaScript frameworks
HTTP/3	Miscellaneous
Isotope	JavaScript libraries
jQuery 3.7.1	JavaScript libraries
LiteSpeed	Web servers
Modernizr 2.6.2	JavaScript libraries
MySQL	Databases
Open Graph	Miscellaneous
OWL Carousel	JavaScript libraries
PHP 8.4.7	Programming languages
Twitter Emoji (Twemoji)	Font scripts
WordPress	CMS, Blogs
wpBakery	Page builders, WordPress plugins
AddToAny	Widgets
CookieYes	Cookie compliance
reCAPTCHA	Security
Lodash 1.13.7	JavaScript libraries
MediaElement.js 4.2.17	Video players
HSTS	Security
RSS	Miscellaneous
Slider Revolution 6.7.34	Widgets, Photo galleries

Web Application Vulnerabilities

Evidence

URL	Evidence
https://www.lisaccount.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://www.lisaccount.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	Method	Parameters	Evidence
https://www.lisaccount.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	`1 : <link href="http://gmpg.org/xfn/11" rel="profile"/>`
https://www.lisaccount.com/	POST	Body: _wp_http_referer=/ security-pass=43b6445295 user_login=1d3d2d231d2dd4 Headers: Content-Type=application/x-www-form-urlencoded 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	`1 : <link href="http://gmpg.org/xfn/11" rel="profile"/>`

Vulnerability description

We noticed that the target application is serving mixed content. This occurs when initial HTML is loaded over a secure HTTPS connection, but other resources (such as images, videos, stylesheets, scripts) are loaded over an insecure HTTP connection. This is called mixed content because both HTTP and HTTPS content are being loaded to display the same page, and the initial request was secure over HTTPS.

Risk description

The risk is that the insecurely loaded resources (HTTP) on an otherwise secure page (HTTPS) can be intercepted or manipulated by attackers, potentially leading to eavesdropping or content tampering.

Recommendation

Ensure that all external resources the page references are loaded using HTTPS.

Classification

CWE	CWE-311
OWASP Top 10 - 2017
OWASP Top 10 - 2021

Evidence

Software / Version	Category
Animate.css	UI frameworks
Calendly	Appointment scheduling
Clipboard.js	JavaScript libraries
Contact Form 7	WordPress plugins, Form builders
jQuery Migrate 3.4.1	JavaScript libraries
AddToAny Share Buttons	WordPress plugins
core-js 3.39.0	JavaScript libraries
Google Font API	Font scripts
GSAP	JavaScript frameworks
HTTP/3	Miscellaneous
Isotope	JavaScript libraries
jQuery 3.7.1	JavaScript libraries
LiteSpeed	Web servers
Modernizr 2.6.2	JavaScript libraries
MySQL	Databases
Open Graph	Miscellaneous
OWL Carousel	JavaScript libraries
PHP 8.4.7	Programming languages
Twitter Emoji (Twemoji)	Font scripts
WordPress	CMS, Blogs
wpBakery	Page builders, WordPress plugins
AddToAny	Widgets
CookieYes	Cookie compliance
reCAPTCHA	Security
Lodash 1.13.7	JavaScript libraries
MediaElement.js 4.2.17	Video players
HSTS	Security
RSS	Miscellaneous
Slider Revolution 6.7.34	Widgets, Photo galleries

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
https://www.lisaccount.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://www.lisaccount.com/	`<input class="form-control sq-username" name="log" placeholder="Username" required="" type="text" value=""/> <input autocomplete="off" class="sq-password form-control" name="pwd" placeholder="Password" required="" spellcheck="false" type="password" value=""/> <button class="btn btn-lg btn-default btn-block" type="submit">Sign in</button>`

Vulnerability description

We have discovered that the target application presents a login interface that could be a potential target for attacks. While login interfaces are standard for user authentication, they can become vulnerabilities if not properly secured.

Risk description

The risk is that an attacker could use this interface to mount brute force attacks against known passwords and usernames combinations leaked throughout the web.

Recommendation

Ensure each interface is not bypassable using common knowledge of the application or leaked credentials using occasional password audits.

Evidence

URL	Method	Parameters	Evidence
https://www.lisaccount.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: geral@lisaccount.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

Evidence

URL
Missing: https://www.lisaccount.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	Summary
https://www.lisaccount.com/	OPTIONS	We did a HTTP OPTIONS request. The server responded with a 200 status code and the header: `Allow: OPTIONS,HEAD,GET,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

We managed to detect a publicly accessible File Transfer Protocol (FTP) service.

PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION
21/tcp open ftp Pure-FTPd

Vulnerability description

We found that the File Transfer Protocol (FTP) service is publicly accessible. The FTP enables client systems to connect to upload and download files. Nonetheless, FTP lacks encryption for the data exchanged between the server and the client, leaving all transferred data exposed in plaintext.

Risk description

Exposing this service online can enable attackers to execute man-in-the-middle attacks, capturing sensitive user credentials and the contents of files because FTP operates without encryption. The entirety of the communication between the client and the server remains unsecured in plaintext. This acquired information could further facilitate additional attacks within the network.

Recommendation

We recommend turning off FTP access over the Internet and instead using a Virtual Private Network (VPN) that mandates two-factor authentication (2FA). If the FTP service is essential for business purposes, we recommend limiting access only from designated IP addresses using a firewall. Furthermore, utilizing SFTP (Secure File Transfer Protocol) is recommended as this protocol employs encryption to secure data transfers.

Evidence

We managed to detect a publicly accessible Post Office Protocol (POP3) service.

Starting Nmap ( https://nmap.org ) at 2025-06-14 18:33 EEST
Nmap scan report for www.lisaccount.com (185.146.22.230)
Host is up (0.020s latency).
rDNS record for 185.146.22.230: nl1-ts3.a2hosting.com

PORT    STATE SERVICE  VERSION
995/tcp open  ssl/pop3 Dovecot pop3d
|_pop3-capabilities: PIPELINING SASL(PLAIN LOGIN) RESP-CODES USER AUTH-RESP-CODE UIDL CAPA TOP

Service detection performed. Please report any incorrect results at https://nmap.org/submit/ .
Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 6.67 seconds

Vulnerability description

We found that the Post Office Protocol (POP3) service is publicly accessible and doesn’t include STARTTLS capability. Email clients use the Post Office Protocol (POP) to download emails for user accounts. Some POP servers are initially set up to operate over an unsecured protocol. When email clients download email content through this plaintext protocol, it can pose a substantial risk to the organization's network, especially depending on which user account is set to receive the emails.

Risk description

Exposing this service online can enable attackers to conduct man-in-the-middle attacks, thereby gaining access to sensitive user credentials and the contents of emails. Given that POP3 operates via a plaintext protocol, the entirety of the data exchanged between the client and server is left unencrypted. This critical information could then be leveraged in further attacks on the organization's network.

Recommendation

We recommend turning off POP3 access over the Internet and instead using a Virtual Private Network (VPN) that mandates two-factor authentication (2FA). If the POP3 service is essential for business purposes, we recommend limiting access only from designated IP addresses using a firewall. Furthermore, activating STARTTLS capability (switching the connection to a secure communication) or utilizing Secure POP3 (POP3S) is recommended, as this protocol employs encryption.

Evidence

Domain Queried	DNS Record Type	Description	Value
www.lisaccount.com	SPF	Sender Policy Framework	"v=spf1 +a +mx +ip4:185.146.22.230 include:spf.a2hosting.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
www.lisaccount.com	A	IPv4 address	185.146.22.230
www.lisaccount.com	NS	Name server	ns2.a2hosting.com
www.lisaccount.com	NS	Name server	ns4.a2hosting.com
www.lisaccount.com	NS	Name server	ns3.a2hosting.com
www.lisaccount.com	NS	Name server	ns1.a2hosting.com
www.lisaccount.com	MX	Mail server	0 mail.lisaccount.com
www.lisaccount.com	SOA	Start of Authority	ns1.a2hosting.com. root.nl1-ts3.a2hosting.com. 2025061401 3600 1800 1209600 86400
www.lisaccount.com	SPF	Sender Policy Framework	"v=spf1 +a +mx +ip4:185.146.22.230 include:spf.a2hosting.com ~all"
www.lisaccount.com	CNAME	Canonical name	lisaccount.com

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
HP P2000 G3 NAS device	93%

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

Software / Version	Category
TwistedWeb 9.0.0	Web servers
HSTS	Security
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

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.