Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | Windows 10 end of life - efex |
| Description: | If you're using a Windows 10 device after 14 October 2025 Microsoft will no longer be providing support. Upgrade to Windows 11 to avoid the risk. |
| ip_address | 45.76.125.59 |
| country | AU  |
| network_name | The Constant Company, LLC |
| asn | AS20473 |
80/tcp | http | nginx - |
443/tcp | https | nginx - |
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Adobe ColdFusion | Web frameworks |
| cdnjs | CDN |
| Font Awesome | Font scripts |
| Adobe Fonts | Font scripts |
| Bootstrap 5.2.2 | UI frameworks |
| Google Analytics | Analytics |
| jQuery 3.5.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Nginx | Web servers, Reverse proxies |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| Typekit | Font scripts |
| PWA | Miscellaneous |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| HSTS | Security |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://www.efex.com.au/campaigns/windows-10-end-of-life/ | Response headers include the HTTP Content-Security-Policy security header with the following security issues: |
Vulnerability description
We noticed that the Content-Security-Policy (CSP) header configured for the web application includes unsafe directives. The CSP header activates a protection mechanism implemented in web browsers which prevents exploitation of Cross-Site Scripting vulnerabilities (XSS) by restricting the sources from which content can be loaded or executed.
Risk description
For example, if the unsafe-inline directive is present in the CSP header, the execution of inline scripts and event handlers is allowed. This can be exploited by an attacker to execute arbitrary JavaScript code in the context of the vulnerable application.
Recommendation
Remove the unsafe values from the directives, adopt nonces or hashes for safer inclusion of inline scripts if they are needed, and explicitly define the sources from which scripts, styles, images or other resources can be loaded.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-693 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Adobe ColdFusion | Web frameworks |
| cdnjs | CDN |
| Font Awesome | Font scripts |
| Adobe Fonts | Font scripts |
| Bootstrap 5.2.2 | UI frameworks |
| Google Analytics | Analytics |
| jQuery 3.5.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Nginx | Web servers, Reverse proxies |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| Typekit | Font scripts |
| PWA | Miscellaneous |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| HSTS | Security |
Vulnerability description
We noticed that server software and technology details are exposed, potentially aiding attackers in tailoring specific exploits against identified systems and versions.
Risk description
The risk is that an attacker could use this information to mount specific attacks against the identified software type and version.
Recommendation
We recommend you to eliminate the information which permits the identification of software platform, technology, server and operating system: HTTP server headers, HTML meta information, etc.
Evidence
Vulnerability description
We found the robots.txt on the target server. This file instructs web crawlers what URLs and endpoints of the web application they can visit and crawl. Website administrators often misuse this file while attempting to hide some web pages from the users.
Risk description
There is no particular security risk in having a robots.txt file. However, it's important to note that adding endpoints in it should not be considered a security measure, as this file can be directly accessed and read by anyone.
Recommendation
We recommend you to manually review the entries from robots.txt and remove the ones which lead to sensitive locations in the website (ex. administration panels, configuration files, etc).
Vulnerability description
We have noticed that the server is missing the security.txt file, which is considered a good practice for web security. It provides a standardized way for security researchers and the public to report security vulnerabilities or concerns by outlining the preferred method of contact and reporting procedures.
Risk description
There is no particular risk in not having a security.txt file for your server. However, this file is important because it offers a designated channel for reporting vulnerabilities and security issues.
Recommendation
We recommend you to implement the security.txt file according to the standard, in order to allow researchers or users report any security issues they find, improving the defensive mechanisms of your server.
Infrastructure Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| Operating System | Accuracy |
|---|---|
| Linux 3.10 - 4.11 | 93% |
Vulnerability description
OS Detection
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| www.efex.com.au | A | IPv4 address | 45.76.125.59 |
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 |
|---|---|
| CFML | Programming languages |
| Bootstrap 5.2.2 | UI frameworks |
| Adobe ColdFusion | Web frameworks |
| Nginx | Web servers, Reverse proxies |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| Unpkg | CDN |
| Typekit | Font scripts |
| Font Awesome | Font scripts |
| cdnjs | CDN |
| Adobe Fonts | Font scripts |
| jQuery 3.5.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Google Analytics | Analytics |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| HSTS | Security |
| LottieFiles | 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.