Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | Home - Vrunda Vitthal Group |
| Description: | No description found |
| ip_address | 162.241.80.12 |
| country | US  |
| network_name | Oracle Corporation |
| asn | AS31898 |
21/tcp | ftp | Pure-FTPd - |
22/tcp | ssh | OpenSSH 8.7 |
25/tcp | tcpwrapped | - - |
26/tcp | tcpwrapped | - - |
53/tcp | domain | - - |
80/tcp | http | Apache httpd - |
110/tcp | pop3 | Dovecot pop3d - |
143/tcp | imap | Dovecot imapd - |
443/tcp | https | Apache httpd - |
465/tcp | tcpwrapped | - - |
587/tcp | tcpwrapped | - - |
993/tcp | imap | Dovecot imapd - |
995/tcp | pop3 | Dovecot pop3d - |
2078/tcp | https | cPanel httpd - |
2082/tcp | http | - - |
2083/tcp | https | - - |
2086/tcp | http | - - |
2087/tcp | https | - - |
2222/tcp | ssh | OpenSSH 8.7 |
3306/tcp | mysql | MySQL - |
No technologies could be detected.
Web Application Vulnerabilities
No vulnerabilities were found.
Infrastructure Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | CISA KEV | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2024-11205 | 8.5 | 0.00435 | 0.62676 | No | The WPForms plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized modification of data due to a missing capability check on the 'wpforms_is_admin_page' function in versions starting from 1.8.4 up to, and including, 1.9.2.1. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Subscriber-level access and above, to refund payments and cancel subscriptions. |
| CVE-2023-7063 | 7.2 | 0.01381 | 0.80139 | No | The WPForms Pro plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via form submission parameters in all versions up to, and including, 1.8.5.3 due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to inject arbitrary web scripts in pages that will execute whenever a user accesses an injected page. |
| CVE-2024-13403 | 6.4 | 0.00205 | 0.42418 | No | The WPForms – Easy Form Builder for WordPress – Contact Forms, Payment Forms, Surveys, & More plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the ‘fieldHTML’ parameter in all versions up to, and including, 1.9.3.1 due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Contributor-level access and above, to inject arbitrary web scripts in pages that will execute whenever a user accesses an injected page. |
| CVE-2024-11223 | 4.7 | 0.00122 | 0.31239 | No | The WPForms WordPress plugin before 1.9.2.3 does not sanitise and escape some of its settings, which could allow high privilege users such as admin to perform Stored Cross-Site Scripting attacks even when the unfiltered_html capability is disallowed (for example in multisite setup). |
| CVE-2024-56276 | 4.3 | 0.00409 | 0.6102 | No | Missing Authorization vulnerability in WPForms Contact Form by WPForms allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects Contact Form by WPForms: from n/a through 1.9.2.2. |
Vulnerability description
Vulnerabilities found for WPForms 1.8.5.2
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-2023-38408 | 9.8 | 0.69186 | 0.9862 | No | The PKCS#11 feature in ssh-agent in OpenSSH before 9.3p2 has an insufficiently trustworthy search path, leading to remote code execution if an agent is forwarded to an attacker-controlled system. (Code in /usr/lib is not necessarily safe for loading into ssh-agent.) NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2016-10009. |
| CVE-2024-6387 | 8.1 | 0.5451 | 0.97997 | No | A security regression (CVE-2006-5051) was discovered in OpenSSH's server (sshd). There is a race condition which can lead sshd to handle some signals in an unsafe manner. An unauthenticated, remote attacker may be able to trigger it by failing to authenticate within a set time period. |
| CVE-2021-41617 | 7 | 0.00274 | 0.50574 | No | sshd in OpenSSH 6.2 through 8.x before 8.8, when certain non-default configurations are used, allows privilege escalation because supplemental groups are not initialized as expected. Helper programs for AuthorizedKeysCommand and AuthorizedPrincipalsCommand may run with privileges associated with group memberships of the sshd process, if the configuration specifies running the command as a different user. |
| CVE-2025-26465 | 6.8 | 0.59965 | 0.98239 | No | A vulnerability was found in OpenSSH when the VerifyHostKeyDNS option is enabled. A machine-in-the-middle attack can be performed by a malicious machine impersonating a legit server. This issue occurs due to how OpenSSH mishandles error codes in specific conditions when verifying the host key. For an attack to be considered successful, the attacker needs to manage to exhaust the client's memory resource first, turning the attack complexity high. |
| CVE-2023-51385 | 6.5 | 0.16522 | 0.94837 | No | In ssh in OpenSSH before 9.6, OS command injection might occur if a user name or host name has shell metacharacters, and this name is referenced by an expansion token in certain situations. For example, an untrusted Git repository can have a submodule with shell metacharacters in a user name or host name. |
Vulnerability description
Vulnerabilities found for Openssh 8.7
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-2024-11205 | 8.5 | 0.00435 | 0.62676 | No | The WPForms plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized modification of data due to a missing capability check on the 'wpforms_is_admin_page' function in versions starting from 1.8.4 up to, and including, 1.9.2.1. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Subscriber-level access and above, to refund payments and cancel subscriptions. |
| CVE-2023-7063 | 7.2 | 0.01381 | 0.80139 | No | The WPForms Pro plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via form submission parameters in all versions up to, and including, 1.8.5.3 due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to inject arbitrary web scripts in pages that will execute whenever a user accesses an injected page. |
| CVE-2024-13403 | 6.4 | 0.00205 | 0.42418 | No | The WPForms – Easy Form Builder for WordPress – Contact Forms, Payment Forms, Surveys, & More plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the ‘fieldHTML’ parameter in all versions up to, and including, 1.9.3.1 due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Contributor-level access and above, to inject arbitrary web scripts in pages that will execute whenever a user accesses an injected page. |
| CVE-2024-11223 | 4.7 | 0.00122 | 0.31239 | No | The WPForms WordPress plugin before 1.9.2.3 does not sanitise and escape some of its settings, which could allow high privilege users such as admin to perform Stored Cross-Site Scripting attacks even when the unfiltered_html capability is disallowed (for example in multisite setup). |
| CVE-2024-56276 | 4.3 | 0.00409 | 0.6102 | No | Missing Authorization vulnerability in WPForms Contact Form by WPForms allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects Contact Form by WPForms: from n/a through 1.9.2.2. |
Vulnerability description
Vulnerabilities found for WPForms 1.8.5.2
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-2023-38408 | 9.8 | 0.69186 | 0.9862 | No | The PKCS#11 feature in ssh-agent in OpenSSH before 9.3p2 has an insufficiently trustworthy search path, leading to remote code execution if an agent is forwarded to an attacker-controlled system. (Code in /usr/lib is not necessarily safe for loading into ssh-agent.) NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2016-10009. |
| CVE-2024-6387 | 8.1 | 0.5451 | 0.97997 | No | A security regression (CVE-2006-5051) was discovered in OpenSSH's server (sshd). There is a race condition which can lead sshd to handle some signals in an unsafe manner. An unauthenticated, remote attacker may be able to trigger it by failing to authenticate within a set time period. |
| CVE-2021-41617 | 7 | 0.00274 | 0.50574 | No | sshd in OpenSSH 6.2 through 8.x before 8.8, when certain non-default configurations are used, allows privilege escalation because supplemental groups are not initialized as expected. Helper programs for AuthorizedKeysCommand and AuthorizedPrincipalsCommand may run with privileges associated with group memberships of the sshd process, if the configuration specifies running the command as a different user. |
| CVE-2025-26465 | 6.8 | 0.59965 | 0.98239 | No | A vulnerability was found in OpenSSH when the VerifyHostKeyDNS option is enabled. A machine-in-the-middle attack can be performed by a malicious machine impersonating a legit server. This issue occurs due to how OpenSSH mishandles error codes in specific conditions when verifying the host key. For an attack to be considered successful, the attacker needs to manage to exhaust the client's memory resource first, turning the attack complexity high. |
| CVE-2023-51385 | 6.5 | 0.16522 | 0.94837 | No | In ssh in OpenSSH before 9.6, OS command injection might occur if a user name or host name has shell metacharacters, and this name is referenced by an expansion token in certain situations. For example, an untrusted Git repository can have a submodule with shell metacharacters in a user name or host name. |
Vulnerability description
Vulnerabilities found for Openssh 8.7
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 a publicly accessible SSH service. Starting Nmap ( https://nmap.org ) at 2026-03-23 15:41 EET Nmap scan report for vrundavitthal.com (162.241.80.12) Host is up (0.14s latency). rDNS record for 162.241.80.12: wp001.webhostingservices.com
PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION 22/tcp open ssh OpenSSH 8.7 (protocol 2.0) | ssh-auth-methods: | Supported authentication methods: | publickey | password |_ keyboard-interactive
Service detection performed. Please report any incorrect results at https://nmap.org/submit/ . Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 2.83 seconds
Vulnerability description
We found that the SSH service with username/password authentication is publicly accessible. Network administrators often use remote administration protocols to control devices like switches, routers, and other essential systems. However, allowing these services to be accessible via the Internet can increase security risks, creating potential opportunities for attacks on the organization.
Risk description
Exposing this service online with username/password authentication can enable attackers to launch authentication attacks, like guessing login credentials, and potentially gaining unauthorized access. Vulnerabilities, such as unpatched software, protocol flaws, or backdoors could also be exploited. An example is the CVE-2024-3094 (XZ Utils Backdoor) vulnerability.
Recommendation
We recommend turning off SSH with username/password authentication access over the Internet and instead using a Virtual Private Network (VPN) that mandates two-factor authentication (2FA). If the SSH service is essential for business purposes, we recommend limiting access only from designated IP addresses using a firewall. Furthermore, it is advisable to utilize SSH Public Key Authentication since it employs a key pair to verify the identity of a user or process.
Evidence
We managed to detect a publicly accessible SSH service. Starting Nmap ( https://nmap.org ) at 2026-03-23 15:42 EET Nmap scan report for vrundavitthal.com (162.241.80.12) Host is up (0.14s latency). rDNS record for 162.241.80.12: wp001.webhostingservices.com
PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION 2222/tcp open ssh OpenSSH 8.7 (protocol 2.0) | ssh-auth-methods: | Supported authentication methods: | publickey | password |_ keyboard-interactive
Service detection performed. Please report any incorrect results at https://nmap.org/submit/ . Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 1.88 seconds
Vulnerability description
We found that the SSH service with username/password authentication is publicly accessible. Network administrators often use remote administration protocols to control devices like switches, routers, and other essential systems. However, allowing these services to be accessible via the Internet can increase security risks, creating potential opportunities for attacks on the organization.
Risk description
Exposing this service online with username/password authentication can enable attackers to launch authentication attacks, like guessing login credentials, and potentially gaining unauthorized access. Vulnerabilities, such as unpatched software, protocol flaws, or backdoors could also be exploited. An example is the CVE-2024-3094 (XZ Utils Backdoor) vulnerability.
Recommendation
We recommend turning off SSH with username/password authentication access over the Internet and instead using a Virtual Private Network (VPN) that mandates two-factor authentication (2FA). If the SSH service is essential for business purposes, we recommend limiting access only from designated IP addresses using a firewall. Furthermore, it is advisable to utilize SSH Public Key Authentication since it employs a key pair to verify the identity of a user or process.
Evidence
We managed to detect a publicly accessible MySQL service. PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION 3306/tcp open mysql MySQL
Vulnerability description
We identified that the MySQL service is publicly accessible. MySQL serves as a common database for numerous web applications and services for data storage, making it a potential prime target for determined attackers.
Risk description
The risk exists that an attacker exploits this issue by launching a password-based attack on the MySQL service. Furthermore, they could exploit zero-day vulnerabilities to obtain remote access to the MySQL database server, thereby gaining complete control over its operating system and associated services. Such an attack could lead to the exposure of confidential or sensitive information.
Recommendation
We recommend turning off public Internet access to MySQL and opting for a Virtual Private Network (VPN) that enforces two-factor authentication (2FA). Avoid enabling direct user authentication to the MySQL service via the Internet, as this could enable attackers to engage in password-guessing and potentially initiate attacks leading to complete control. However, if the MySQL service is required to be directly accessible over the Internet, we recommend reconfiguring it to be accessible only from known IP addresses.
Evidence
| DKIM selector | Key type | Key size | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| default | rsa | 1422 | "v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEArd5Egu94E3PT7mOsNFehfYGfm1D4lRlecJeMscwRW7R3gr6Z+3HFu/u4ozb875h0JFgn5QrbweSx6pOGpul7vHEJC+RXsSPBn7DZWWAmN/5G/cvrhKIZpmQC+pEq9wVrvHa2ah8r6OASoYowEHIkutPfRwmfpIGQyjHYgLny2RYRqBBJlSs6wrSBOzrLe5dBW" "b7Su4nHA98ZOPk/4wdndg9kXA+AhIC/UV01qJl/VIDuxLmoCUW9gFq6QmP4zPCD1kvJxH1pJKu4ssWUzZadRD4a8+fZyvj2Lc+dxZnbdnpzSLSfFZN5X64CJQUHn3lLQ8/eU9MlfBXQp9iAcIf8VwIDAQAB;" |
Vulnerability description
We found that the DKIM record uses common selectors. The use of common DKIM selectors such as default, test, dkim, or mail may indicate a lack of proper customization or key management. Attackers often target domains using such selectors because they suggest that the domain is relying on default configurations, which could be less secure and easier to exploit. This can increase the risk of DKIM key exposure or misuse.
Risk description
Using a common DKIM selector makes it easier for attackers to predict and exploit email authentication weaknesses. Attackers may attempt to find corresponding DKIM keys or improperly managed records associated with common selectors. If a common selector is coupled with a weak key length or poor key management practices, it significantly increases the likelihood of email spoofing and phishing attacks.
Recommendation
We recommend using unique, customized selectors for each DKIM key to make it more difficult for attackers to predict and target the domain's DKIM records. Regularly rotate selectors and associated keys to further strengthen the security of your domain's email authentication infrastructure.
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 2026-03-23 15:41 EET Nmap scan report for vrundavitthal.com (162.241.80.12) Host is up (0.14s latency). rDNS record for 162.241.80.12: wp001.webhostingservices.com
PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION 995/tcp open ssl/pop3 Dovecot pop3d |_pop3-capabilities: SASL(PLAIN LOGIN) UIDL USER CAPA TOP AUTH-RESP-CODE PIPELINING RESP-CODES
Service detection performed. Please report any incorrect results at https://nmap.org/submit/ . Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 8.28 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
We didn't find any TXT records associated with the target.
Vulnerability description
We found that the target server has no DMARC policy configured. A missing DMARC (Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance) policy means that the domain is not enforcing any DMARC policies to protect against email spoofing and phishing attacks. Without DMARC, even if SPF (Sender Policy Framework) or DKIM (DomainKeys Identified Mail) are configured, there is no mechanism to tell receiving email servers how to handle messages that fail authentication. This leaves the domain vulnerable to abuse, such as email spoofing and impersonation.
Risk description
Without a DMARC policy, your domain is highly vulnerable to email spoofing, allowing attackers to impersonate your brand and send fraudulent emails that appear legitimate. This can lead to phishing attacks targeting your customers, employees, or partners, potentially resulting in stolen credentials, financial loss, or unauthorized access to sensitive systems. Additionally, repeated spoofing attempts can severely damage your brand's reputation, as recipients may lose trust in communications from your domain, associating your brand with malicious activity. The absence of DMARC also prevents you from monitoring and mitigating email-based attacks, leaving your domain exposed to ongoing abuse.
Recommendation
We recommend implementing a DMARC policy for your domain. Start by configuring a DMARC record with a policy of p=none, which will allow you to monitor email flows without impacting legitimate emails. This initial setup helps identify how emails from your domain are being processed by recipient servers. Once you’ve verified that legitimate emails are passing SPF and DKIM checks, you can gradually enforce stricter policies like p=quarantine or p=reject to protect against spoofing and phishing attacks. Additionally, include rua and ruf email addresses in the DMARC record to receive aggregate and forensic reports. These reports will provide valuable insights into authentication failures and help you detect any spoofing attempts.
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| vrundavitthal.com | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 a mx include:websitewelcome.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
We found insecure DNS cookie usage on the following nameservers: ns1.bluehost.in, ns2.bluehost.in
Vulnerability description
We found that the server does not implement DNS Cookies or uses them insecurely. DNS Cookies help prevent DNS-based attacks, such as spoofing and amplification attacks.
Risk description
The risk exists because without DNS Cookies, the server is vulnerable to DNS spoofing and amplification attacks. Attackers can manipulate responses or use the server in distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, compromising network availability and security.
Recommendation
We recommend enabling DNS Cookies to prevent spoofed DNS responses. Ensure proper cookie validation is implemented to mitigate DNS amplification attacks. Regularly update DNS servers to support the latest DNS security features.
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| WordPress 6.9.4 | CMS, Blogs |
| Slider Revolution 6.6.20 | Widgets, Photo galleries |
| MySQL | Databases |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| WPForms 1.8.5.2 | WordPress plugins, Form builders |
| Apache HTTP Server | Web servers |
| Twenty Twenty-One | WordPress themes |
| WP Rocket | Caching, WordPress plugins |
| Essential Addons for Elementor | WordPress plugins |
| Elementor 3.35.7 | Page builders, WordPress plugins |
| Yoast SEO 27.2 | SEO, WordPress plugins |
| Site Kit 1.174.0 | Analytics, WordPress plugins |
| Slick | JavaScript libraries |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| Underscore.js 1.13.7 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery Migrate 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Google Analytics GA4 | Analytics |
| Font Awesome | Font scripts |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| vrundavitthal.com | A | IPv4 address | 162.241.80.12 |
| vrundavitthal.com | NS | Name server | ns1.bluehost.in |
| vrundavitthal.com | NS | Name server | ns2.bluehost.in |
| vrundavitthal.com | MX | Mail server | 0 mail.vrundavitthal.com |
| vrundavitthal.com | SOA | Start of Authority | ns1.bluehost.in. root.wp001.webhostingservices.com. 2024120300 86400 7200 3600000 300 |
| vrundavitthal.com | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 a mx include:websitewelcome.com ~all" |
Risk description
An initial step for an attacker aiming to learn about an organization involves conducting searches on its domain names to uncover DNS records associated with the organization. This strategy aims to amass comprehensive insights into the target domain, enabling the attacker to outline the organization's external digital landscape. This gathered intelligence may subsequently serve as a foundation for launching attacks, including those based on social engineering techniques. DNS records pointing to services or servers that are no longer in use can provide an attacker with an easy entry point into the network.
Recommendation
We recommend reviewing all DNS records associated with the domain and identifying and removing unused or obsolete records.
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| WordPress 6.9.4 | CMS, Blogs |
| Slider Revolution 6.6.20 | Widgets, Photo galleries |
| MySQL | Databases |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| WPForms 1.8.5.2 | WordPress plugins, Form builders |
| Apache HTTP Server | Web servers |
| Twenty Twenty-One | WordPress themes |
| WP Rocket | Caching, WordPress plugins |
| Essential Addons for Elementor | WordPress plugins |
| Elementor 3.35.7 | Page builders, WordPress plugins |
| Yoast SEO 27.2 | SEO, WordPress plugins |
| Site Kit 1.174.0 | Analytics, WordPress plugins |
| Slick | JavaScript libraries |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| Underscore.js 1.13.7 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery Migrate 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Google Analytics GA4 | Analytics |
| Font Awesome | Font scripts |
| Google Font API | Font scripts |
| RSS | Miscellaneous |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
Vulnerability description
We noticed that server software and technology details are exposed, potentially aiding attackers in tailoring specific exploits against identified systems and versions.
Risk description
The risk is that an attacker could use this information to mount specific attacks against the identified software type and version.
Recommendation
We recommend you to eliminate the information which permits the identification of software platform, technology, server and operating system: HTTP server headers, HTML meta information, etc.
Evidence
| DKIM selector | Key type | Key size | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| default | rsa | 1422 | "v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEArd5Egu94E3PT7mOsNFehfYGfm1D4lRlecJeMscwRW7R3gr6Z+3HFu/u4ozb875h0JFgn5QrbweSx6pOGpul7vHEJC+RXsSPBn7DZWWAmN/5G/cvrhKIZpmQC+pEq9wVrvHa2ah8r6OASoYowEHIkutPfRwmfpIGQyjHYgLny2RYRqBBJlSs6wrSBOzrLe5dBW" "b7Su4nHA98ZOPk/4wdndg9kXA+AhIC/UV01qJl/VIDuxLmoCUW9gFq6QmP4zPCD1kvJxH1pJKu4ssWUzZadRD4a8+fZyvj2Lc+dxZnbdnpzSLSfFZN5X64CJQUHn3lLQ8/eU9MlfBXQp9iAcIf8VwIDAQAB;" |
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.
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 |
|---|---|
| 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.
Evidence
| Operating System | Accuracy |
|---|---|
| Cisco Unified Communications Manager VoIP adapter | 100% |
Vulnerability description
OS Detection