Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | ZONA66 | Aplikasi Situs Slot777 Terbaru Bet 200 400 Perak Mudah Menang Maxwin |
| Description: | Temukan keseruan bermain di aplikasi situs slot777 terbaru dengan peluang Maxwin tinggi setiap hari! pilihan game seru dengan taruhan mulai 200 400 perak saja. Gabung sekarang dan rasakan sensasi menang besar di situs slot resmi dan terpercaya yang memberikan jackpot melimpah setiap putarannya. |
| ip_address | 121.100.22.3 |
| country | ID  |
| network_name | Pt Indonesia Comnets Plus |
| asn | AS9341 |
80/tcp | http | Apache httpd 2.2.21 |
443/tcp | https | - - |
1723/tcp | pptp | MikroTik (Firmware: 1) |
2000/tcp | bandwidth-test | MikroTik bandwidth-test server - |
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Microsoft Advertising | Advertising |
| Apache HTTP Server 2.2.21 | Web servers |
| Magento | Ecommerce |
| Windows Server | Operating systems |
| mod_ssl 2.2.21 | Web server extensions |
| MySQL | Databases |
| OpenSSL 1.0.0e | Web server extensions |
| mod_perl 2.0.4 | Web server extensions |
| Perl 5.10.1 | Programming languages |
| PHP 5.3.8 | Programming languages |
| Ruby | Programming languages |
| Ruby on Rails | Web frameworks |
| AMP | JavaScript frameworks |
| Cloudflare Browser Insights | Analytics, RUM |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2018-6913 | 9.8 | 0.0345 | 0.86979 | Heap-based buffer overflow in the pack function in Perl before 5.26.2 allows context-dependent attackers to execute arbitrary code via a large item count. |
| CVE-2018-18314 | 9.8 | 0.04395 | 0.88444 | Perl before 5.26.3 has a buffer overflow via a crafted regular expression that triggers invalid write operations. |
| CVE-2018-18312 | 9.8 | 0.0927 | 0.92344 | Perl before 5.26.3 and 5.28.0 before 5.28.1 has a buffer overflow via a crafted regular expression that triggers invalid write operations. |
| CVE-2018-18311 | 9.8 | 0.11092 | 0.93113 | Perl before 5.26.3 and 5.28.x before 5.28.1 has a buffer overflow via a crafted regular expression that triggers invalid write operations. |
| CVE-2017-12814 | 9.8 | 0.06803 | 0.90863 | Stack-based buffer overflow in the CPerlHost::Add method in win32/perlhost.h in Perl before 5.24.3-RC1 and 5.26.x before 5.26.1-RC1 on Windows allows attackers to execute arbitrary code via a long environment variable. |
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Outdated or vulnerable software components include versions of server-side software that are no longer supported or have known, publicly disclosed vulnerabilities.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
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2011-2767 | 9.8 | 0.05542 | 0.89778 | mod_perl 2.0 through 2.0.10 allows attackers to execute arbitrary Perl code by placing it in a user-owned .htaccess file, because (contrary to the documentation) there is no configuration option that permits Perl code for the administrator's control of HTTP request processing without also permitting unprivileged users to run Perl code in the context of the user account that runs Apache HTTP Server processes. |
| CVE-2007-1349 | 5 | 0.17132 | 0.94685 | PerlRun.pm in Apache mod_perl before 1.30, and RegistryCooker.pm in mod_perl 2.x, does not properly escape PATH_INFO before use in a regular expression, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (resource consumption) via a crafted URI. |
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
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2022-31813 | 9.8 | 0.0004 | 0.1204 | Apache HTTP Server 2.4.53 and earlier may not send the X-Forwarded-* headers to the origin server based on client side Connection header hop-by-hop mechanism. This may be used to bypass IP based authentication on the origin server/application. |
| CVE-2022-22720 | 9.8 | 0.31719 | 0.9656 | Apache HTTP Server 2.4.52 and earlier fails to close inbound connection when errors are encountered discarding the request body, exposing the server to HTTP Request Smuggling |
| CVE-2021-44790 | 9.8 | 0.86011 | 0.99347 | A carefully crafted request body can cause a buffer overflow in the mod_lua multipart parser (r:parsebody() called from Lua scripts). The Apache httpd team is not aware of an exploit for the vulnerabilty though it might be possible to craft one. This issue affects Apache HTTP Server 2.4.51 and earlier. |
| CVE-2021-39275 | 9.8 | 0.42791 | 0.97304 | ap_escape_quotes() may write beyond the end of a buffer when given malicious input. No included modules pass untrusted data to these functions, but third-party / external modules may. This issue affects Apache HTTP Server 2.4.48 and earlier. |
| CVE-2017-7679 | 9.8 | 0.40109 | 0.97149 | In Apache httpd 2.2.x before 2.2.33 and 2.4.x before 2.4.26, mod_mime can read one byte past the end of a buffer when sending a malicious Content-Type response header. |
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
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2016-2108 | 9.8 | 0.56355 | 0.9798 | The ASN.1 implementation in OpenSSL before 1.0.1o and 1.0.2 before 1.0.2c allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (buffer underflow and memory corruption) via an ANY field in crafted serialized data, aka the "negative zero" issue. |
| CVE-2016-2176 | 8.2 | 0.09792 | 0.92595 | The X509_NAME_oneline function in crypto/x509/x509_obj.c in OpenSSL before 1.0.1t and 1.0.2 before 1.0.2h allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information from process stack memory or cause a denial of service (buffer over-read) via crafted EBCDIC ASN.1 data. |
| CVE-2021-4044 | 7.5 | 0.22162 | 0.95519 | Internally libssl in OpenSSL calls X509_verify_cert() on the client side to verify a certificate supplied by a server. That function may return a negative return value to indicate an internal error (for example out of memory). Such a negative return value is mishandled by OpenSSL and will cause an IO function (such as SSL_connect() or SSL_do_handshake()) to not indicate success and a subsequent call to SSL_get_error() to return the value SSL_ERROR_WANT_RETRY_VERIFY. This return value is only supposed to be returned by OpenSSL if the application has previously called SSL_CTX_set_cert_verify_callback(). Since most applications do not do this the SSL_ERROR_WANT_RETRY_VERIFY return value from SSL_get_error() will be totally unexpected and applications may not behave correctly as a result. The exact behaviour will depend on the application but it could result in crashes, infinite loops or other similar incorrect responses. This issue is made more serious in combination with a separate bug in OpenSSL 3.0 that will cause X509_verify_cert() to indicate an internal error when processing a certificate chain. This will occur where a certificate does not include the Subject Alternative Name extension but where a Certificate Authority has enforced name constraints. This issue can occur even with valid chains. By combining the two issues an attacker could induce incorrect, application dependent behaviour. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.1 (Affected 3.0.0). |
| CVE-2016-2109 | 7.5 | 0.57944 | 0.98053 | The asn1_d2i_read_bio function in crypto/asn1/a_d2i_fp.c in the ASN.1 BIO implementation in OpenSSL before 1.0.1t and 1.0.2 before 1.0.2h allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) via a short invalid encoding. |
| CVE-2016-2106 | 7.5 | 0.6302 | 0.98289 | Integer overflow in the EVP_EncryptUpdate function in crypto/evp/evp_enc.c in OpenSSL before 1.0.1t and 1.0.2 before 1.0.2h allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (heap memory corruption) via a large amount of data. |
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
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2012-2688 | 10 | 0.33392 | 0.96692 | Unspecified vulnerability in the _php_stream_scandir function in the stream implementation in PHP before 5.3.15 and 5.4.x before 5.4.5 has unknown impact and remote attack vectors, related to an "overflow." |
| CVE-2012-2376 | 10 | 0.25024 | 0.95898 | Buffer overflow in the com_print_typeinfo function in PHP 5.4.3 and earlier on Windows allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via crafted arguments that trigger incorrect handling of COM object VARIANT types, as exploited in the wild in May 2012. |
| CVE-2016-2554 | 9.8 | 0.10282 | 0.9281 | Stack-based buffer overflow in ext/phar/tar.c in PHP before 5.5.32, 5.6.x before 5.6.18, and 7.x before 7.0.3 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) or possibly have unspecified other impact via a crafted TAR archive. |
| CVE-2015-5589 | 9.8 | 0.10384 | 0.92849 | The phar_convert_to_other function in ext/phar/phar_object.c in PHP before 5.4.43, 5.5.x before 5.5.27, and 5.6.x before 5.6.11 does not validate a file pointer before a close operation, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (segmentation fault) or possibly have unspecified other impact via a crafted TAR archive that is mishandled in a Phar::convertToData call. |
| CVE-2015-4642 | 9.8 | 0.08047 | 0.91684 | The escapeshellarg function in ext/standard/exec.c in PHP before 5.4.42, 5.5.x before 5.5.26, and 5.6.x before 5.6.10 on Windows allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary OS commands via a crafted string to an application that accepts command-line arguments for a call to the PHP system function. |
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
| URL | Response URL | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| http://bpkad.meranginkab.go.id/img/ | http://bpkad.meranginkab.go.id/img/?info_ID=VW108 | Communication is made over unsecure, unencrypted HTTP. |
Vulnerability description
We noticed that the communication between the web browser and the server is done using the HTTP protocol, which transmits data unencrypted over the network.
Risk description
The risk is that an attacker who manages to intercept the communication at the network level can read and modify the data transmitted (including passwords, secret tokens, credit card information and other sensitive data).
Recommendation
We recommend you to reconfigure the web server to use HTTPS - which encrypts the communication between the web browser and the server.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-311 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Microsoft Advertising | Advertising |
| Apache HTTP Server 2.2.21 | Web servers |
| Magento | Ecommerce |
| Windows Server | Operating systems |
| mod_ssl 2.2.21 | Web server extensions |
| MySQL | Databases |
| OpenSSL 1.0.0e | Web server extensions |
| mod_perl 2.0.4 | Web server extensions |
| Perl 5.10.1 | Programming languages |
| PHP 5.3.8 | Programming languages |
| Ruby | Programming languages |
| Ruby on Rails | Web frameworks |
| AMP | JavaScript frameworks |
| Cloudflare Browser Insights | Analytics, RUM |
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 |
|---|---|
| http://bpkad.meranginkab.go.id/img/ | 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 |
|---|---|
| http://bpkad.meranginkab.go.id/img/ | 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 |
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
Vulnerability description
Website is accessible.
Infrastructure Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | CISA KEV | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2022-31813 | 9.8 | 0.0004 | 0.1204 | No | Apache HTTP Server 2.4.53 and earlier may not send the X-Forwarded-* headers to the origin server based on client side Connection header hop-by-hop mechanism. This may be used to bypass IP based authentication on the origin server/application. |
| CVE-2022-22720 | 9.8 | 0.31719 | 0.9656 | No | Apache HTTP Server 2.4.52 and earlier fails to close inbound connection when errors are encountered discarding the request body, exposing the server to HTTP Request Smuggling |
| CVE-2021-44790 | 9.8 | 0.86011 | 0.99347 | No | A carefully crafted request body can cause a buffer overflow in the mod_lua multipart parser (r:parsebody() called from Lua scripts). The Apache httpd team is not aware of an exploit for the vulnerabilty though it might be possible to craft one. This issue affects Apache HTTP Server 2.4.51 and earlier. |
| CVE-2021-39275 | 9.8 | 0.42791 | 0.97304 | No | ap_escape_quotes() may write beyond the end of a buffer when given malicious input. No included modules pass untrusted data to these functions, but third-party / external modules may. This issue affects Apache HTTP Server 2.4.48 and earlier. |
| CVE-2017-7679 | 9.8 | 0.40109 | 0.97149 | No | In Apache httpd 2.2.x before 2.2.33 and 2.4.x before 2.4.26, mod_mime can read one byte past the end of a buffer when sending a malicious Content-Type response header. |
Vulnerability description
Vulnerabilities found for Apache HTTP Server 2.2.21
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
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | CISA KEV | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2011-2767 | 9.8 | 0.05542 | 0.89778 | No | mod_perl 2.0 through 2.0.10 allows attackers to execute arbitrary Perl code by placing it in a user-owned .htaccess file, because (contrary to the documentation) there is no configuration option that permits Perl code for the administrator's control of HTTP request processing without also permitting unprivileged users to run Perl code in the context of the user account that runs Apache HTTP Server processes. |
| CVE-2007-1349 | 5 | 0.17132 | 0.94685 | No | PerlRun.pm in Apache mod_perl before 1.30, and RegistryCooker.pm in mod_perl 2.x, does not properly escape PATH_INFO before use in a regular expression, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (resource consumption) via a crafted URI. |
Vulnerability description
Vulnerabilities found for mod_perl 2.0.4
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
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | CISA KEV | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2016-2554 | 9.8 | 0.10282 | 0.9281 | No | Stack-based buffer overflow in ext/phar/tar.c in PHP before 5.5.32, 5.6.x before 5.6.18, and 7.x before 7.0.3 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) or possibly have unspecified other impact via a crafted TAR archive. |
| CVE-2015-5589 | 9.8 | 0.10384 | 0.92849 | No | The phar_convert_to_other function in ext/phar/phar_object.c in PHP before 5.4.43, 5.5.x before 5.5.27, and 5.6.x before 5.6.11 does not validate a file pointer before a close operation, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (segmentation fault) or possibly have unspecified other impact via a crafted TAR archive that is mishandled in a Phar::convertToData call. |
| CVE-2015-4642 | 9.8 | 0.08047 | 0.91684 | No | The escapeshellarg function in ext/standard/exec.c in PHP before 5.4.42, 5.5.x before 5.5.26, and 5.6.x before 5.6.10 on Windows allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary OS commands via a crafted string to an application that accepts command-line arguments for a call to the PHP system function. |
| CVE-2012-2688 | 10 | 0.33392 | 0.96692 | No | Unspecified vulnerability in the _php_stream_scandir function in the stream implementation in PHP before 5.3.15 and 5.4.x before 5.4.5 has unknown impact and remote attack vectors, related to an "overflow." |
| CVE-2012-2376 | 10 | 0.25024 | 0.95898 | No | Buffer overflow in the com_print_typeinfo function in PHP 5.4.3 and earlier on Windows allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via crafted arguments that trigger incorrect handling of COM object VARIANT types, as exploited in the wild in May 2012. |
Vulnerability description
Vulnerabilities found for PHP 5.3.8
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
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | CISA KEV | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2016-2108 | 9.8 | 0.56355 | 0.9798 | No | The ASN.1 implementation in OpenSSL before 1.0.1o and 1.0.2 before 1.0.2c allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (buffer underflow and memory corruption) via an ANY field in crafted serialized data, aka the "negative zero" issue. |
| CVE-2016-2176 | 8.2 | 0.09792 | 0.92595 | No | The X509_NAME_oneline function in crypto/x509/x509_obj.c in OpenSSL before 1.0.1t and 1.0.2 before 1.0.2h allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information from process stack memory or cause a denial of service (buffer over-read) via crafted EBCDIC ASN.1 data. |
| CVE-2021-4044 | 7.5 | 0.22162 | 0.95519 | No | Internally libssl in OpenSSL calls X509_verify_cert() on the client side to verify a certificate supplied by a server. That function may return a negative return value to indicate an internal error (for example out of memory). Such a negative return value is mishandled by OpenSSL and will cause an IO function (such as SSL_connect() or SSL_do_handshake()) to not indicate success and a subsequent call to SSL_get_error() to return the value SSL_ERROR_WANT_RETRY_VERIFY. This return value is only supposed to be returned by OpenSSL if the application has previously called SSL_CTX_set_cert_verify_callback(). Since most applications do not do this the SSL_ERROR_WANT_RETRY_VERIFY return value from SSL_get_error() will be totally unexpected and applications may not behave correctly as a result. The exact behaviour will depend on the application but it could result in crashes, infinite loops or other similar incorrect responses. This issue is made more serious in combination with a separate bug in OpenSSL 3.0 that will cause X509_verify_cert() to indicate an internal error when processing a certificate chain. This will occur where a certificate does not include the Subject Alternative Name extension but where a Certificate Authority has enforced name constraints. This issue can occur even with valid chains. By combining the two issues an attacker could induce incorrect, application dependent behaviour. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.1 (Affected 3.0.0). |
| CVE-2016-2109 | 7.5 | 0.57944 | 0.98053 | No | The asn1_d2i_read_bio function in crypto/asn1/a_d2i_fp.c in the ASN.1 BIO implementation in OpenSSL before 1.0.1t and 1.0.2 before 1.0.2h allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) via a short invalid encoding. |
| CVE-2016-2106 | 7.5 | 0.6302 | 0.98289 | No | Integer overflow in the EVP_EncryptUpdate function in crypto/evp/evp_enc.c in OpenSSL before 1.0.1t and 1.0.2 before 1.0.2h allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (heap memory corruption) via a large amount of data. |
Vulnerability description
Vulnerabilities found for OpenSSL 1.0.0e
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
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | CISA KEV | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2018-6913 | 9.8 | 0.0345 | 0.86979 | No | Heap-based buffer overflow in the pack function in Perl before 5.26.2 allows context-dependent attackers to execute arbitrary code via a large item count. |
| CVE-2018-18314 | 9.8 | 0.04395 | 0.88444 | No | Perl before 5.26.3 has a buffer overflow via a crafted regular expression that triggers invalid write operations. |
| CVE-2018-18312 | 9.8 | 0.0927 | 0.92344 | No | Perl before 5.26.3 and 5.28.0 before 5.28.1 has a buffer overflow via a crafted regular expression that triggers invalid write operations. |
| CVE-2018-18311 | 9.8 | 0.11092 | 0.93113 | No | Perl before 5.26.3 and 5.28.x before 5.28.1 has a buffer overflow via a crafted regular expression that triggers invalid write operations. |
| CVE-2017-12814 | 9.8 | 0.06803 | 0.90863 | No | Stack-based buffer overflow in the CPerlHost::Add method in win32/perlhost.h in Perl before 5.24.3-RC1 and 5.26.x before 5.26.1-RC1 on Windows allows attackers to execute arbitrary code via a long environment variable. |
Vulnerability description
Vulnerabilities found for Perl 5.10.1
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
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | CISA KEV | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2020-11023 | 6.9 | 0.21319 | 0.95417 | Yes | 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. |
| CVE-2020-11022 | 6.9 | 0.22547 | 0.95568 | No | 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. |
Vulnerability description
Vulnerabilities found for jQuery 3.4.1
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
We managed to detect that Apache HTTP Server has reached the End-of-Life (EOL).
Version detected: 2.2.21 End-of-life date: 2017-07-11 Latest version for the cycle: 2.2.34 This release cycle (2.2) doesn't have long-term-support (LTS). The cycle was released on 2005-12-01 and its latest release date was 2017-07-11.
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
We managed to detect that PHP has reached the End-of-Life (EOL).
Version detected: 5.3.8 End-of-life date: 2014-08-14 Latest version for the cycle: 5.3.29 This release cycle (5.3) doesn't have long-term-support (LTS). The cycle was released on 2009-06-30 and its latest release date was 2014-08-14. The support ended on 2011-06-30.
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
We managed to detect that OpenSSL has reached the End-of-Life (EOL).
Version detected: 1.0.0e End-of-life date: 2015-12-31 Latest version for the cycle: 1.0.0t This release cycle (1.0.0) doesn't have long-term-support (LTS). The cycle was released on 2010-03-29 and its latest release date was 2015-12-03.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| bpkad.meranginkab.go.id | A | IPv4 address | 121.100.22.3 |
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
| Operating System | Accuracy |
|---|---|
| HP P2000 G3 NAS device | 91% |
Vulnerability description
OS Detection
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Perl 5.10.1 | Programming languages |
| PHP 5.3.8 | Programming languages |
| Windows Server | Operating systems |
| WOW | JavaScript frameworks, Web frameworks, JavaScript graphics |
| Bootstrap 5.0.0 | UI frameworks |
| OpenSSL 1.0.0e | Web server extensions |
| mod_ssl 2.2.21 | Web server extensions |
| mod_perl 2.0.4 | Web server extensions |
| Apache HTTP Server 2.2.21 | Web servers |
| OWL Carousel | JavaScript libraries |
| jsDelivr | CDN |
| jQuery CDN | CDN |
| Lightbox | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Isotope | JavaScript libraries |
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.