Vulnerability Scan Result

Target:

https://arxiv.org/

Scanned target: https://arxiv.org/

Submitted: Jul 18, 2025 from DE

Public Scan

Scan mode: Passive (non-intrusive)

Summary

high

Info

Low

Medium

High

Critical

Screenshot

Title:	arXiv.org e-Print archive
Description:	No description found

IP Information

ip_address	151.101.131.42
country	US
network_name	Fastly Inc
asn	AS54113

ip_address	151.101.195.42
country	US
network_name	Fastly Inc
asn	AS54113

ip_address	151.101.67.42
country	US
network_name	Fastly Inc
asn	AS54113

ip_address	151.101.3.42
country	US
network_name	Fastly Inc
asn	AS54113

Open Ports

80/tcp	http	Varnish -
443/tcp	https	- -

Web Technologies

Software / Version	Category
Google Cloud	IaaS
Google Cloud Trace	Performance
Font Awesome	Font scripts
Apache HTTP Server	Web servers
MathJax 2.7.3	JavaScript graphics
HSTS	Security
Varnish	Caching

Web Application Vulnerabilities

Evidence

Risk Level	CVSS	CVE	Summary	Affected software
	7.5	CVE-2023-39663	Mathjax up to v2.7.9 was discovered to contain two Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) vulnerabilities in MathJax.js via the components pattern and markdownPattern. NOTE: the vendor disputes this because the regular expressions are not applied to user input; thus, there is no risk.	mathjax 2.7.3
	4.3	CVE-2018-1999024	MathJax version prior to version 2.7.4 contains a Cross Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the \unicode{} macro that can result in Potentially untrusted Javascript running within a web browser. This attack appear to be exploitable via The victim must view a page where untrusted content is processed using Mathjax. This vulnerability appears to have been fixed in 2.7.4 and later.	mathjax 2.7.3

Vulnerability description

We noticed known vulnerabilities in the target application based on the server responses. They are usually related to outdated systems and expose the affected applications to the risk of unauthorized access to confidential data and possibly denial of service attacks. Depending on the system distribution the affected software can be patched but displays the same version, requiring manual checking.

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-1026
OWASP Top 10 - 2017
OWASP Top 10 - 2021

Evidence

URL	Cookie Name	Evidence
https://arxiv.org/search/hep-lat	arxiv-search-parameters	Set-Cookie: arxiv-search-parameters={}

Vulnerability description

We found that a cookie has been set without the Secure flag, which means the browser will send it over an unencrypted channel (plain HTTP) if such a request is made. The root cause for this usually revolves around misconfigurations in the code or server settings.

Risk description

The risk exists that an attacker will intercept the clear-text communication between the browser and the server and he will steal the cookie of the user. If this is a session cookie, the attacker could gain unauthorized access to the victim's web session.

Recommendation

Whenever a cookie contains sensitive information or is a session token, then it should always be passed using an encrypted channel. Ensure that the secure flag is set for cookies containing such sensitive information.

Classification

CWE	CWE-614
OWASP Top 10 - 2017
OWASP Top 10 - 2021

Evidence

URL	Cookie Name	Evidence
https://arxiv.org/search/hep-lat	arxiv-search-parameters	The server responded with Set-Cookie header(s) that does not specify the HttpOnly flag: Set-Cookie: arxiv-search-parameters={}

Vulnerability description

We found that a cookie has been set without the HttpOnly flag, which means it can be accessed by potentially malicious JavaScript code running inside the web page. The root cause for this usually revolves around misconfigurations in the code or server settings.

Risk description

The risk is that an attacker who injects malicious JavaScript code on the page (e.g. by using an XSS attack) can access the cookie and can send it to another site. In case of a session cookie, this could lead to session hijacking.

Recommendation

Ensure that the HttpOnly flag is set for all cookies.

Classification

CWE	CWE-1004
OWASP Top 10 - 2017
OWASP Top 10 - 2021

Evidence

Software / Version	Category
Google Cloud	IaaS
Google Cloud Trace	Performance
Font Awesome	Font scripts
Apache HTTP Server	Web servers
MathJax 2.7.3	JavaScript graphics
HSTS	Security
Varnish	Caching

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
https://arxiv.org/	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 Evidence

URL	Evidence
https://arxiv.org/	Response headers include the HTTP Content-Security-Policy security header with the following security issues:`script-src: script-src directive is missing. object-src: Missing object-src allows the injection of plugins which can execute JavaScript. We recommend setting it to 'none'. base-uri: Missing base-uri allows the injection of base tags. They can be used to set the base URL for all relative (script) URLs to an attacker controlled domain. We recommend setting it to 'none' or 'self'. default-src: The default-src directive should be set as a fall-back when other restrictions have not been specified.`

https://arxiv.org/

Response headers include the HTTP Content-Security-Policy security header with the following security issues:script-src: script-src directive is missing. object-src: Missing object-src allows the injection of plugins which can execute JavaScript. We recommend setting it to 'none'. base-uri: Missing base-uri allows the injection of base tags. They can be used to set the base URL for all relative (script) URLs to an attacker controlled domain. We recommend setting it to 'none' or 'self'. default-src: The default-src directive should be set as a fall-back when other restrictions have not been specified.

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

URL	Evidence
https://arxiv.org/	Response headers do not include the X-Content-Type-Options HTTP security header

Vulnerability description

We noticed that the target application's server responses lack the X-Content-Type-Options header. This header is particularly important for preventing Internet Explorer from reinterpreting the content of a web page (MIME-sniffing) and thus overriding the value of the Content-Type header.

Risk description

The risk is that lack of this header could make possible attacks such as Cross-Site Scripting or phishing in Internet Explorer browsers.

Recommendation

We recommend setting the X-Content-Type-Options header such as `X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff`.

Classification

CWE	CWE-693
OWASP Top 10 - 2017
OWASP Top 10 - 2021

Evidence

URL
https://arxiv.org/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://arxiv.org/	Response headers do not include the HTTP Strict-Transport-Security header

Vulnerability description

We noticed that the target application lacks the HTTP Strict-Transport-Security header in its responses. This security header is crucial as it instructs browsers to only establish secure (HTTPS) connections with the web server and reject any HTTP connections.

Risk description

The risk is that lack of this header permits an attacker to force a victim user to initiate a clear-text HTTP connection to the server, thus opening the possibility to eavesdrop on the network traffic and extract sensitive information (e.g. session cookies).

Recommendation

The Strict-Transport-Security HTTP header should be sent with each HTTPS response. The syntax is as follows: `Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=<seconds>[; includeSubDomains]` The parameter `max-age` gives the time frame for requirement of HTTPS in seconds and should be chosen quite high, e.g. several months. A value below 7776000 is considered as too low by this scanner check. The flag `includeSubDomains` defines that the policy applies also for sub domains of the sender of the response.

Classification

CWE	CWE-693
OWASP Top 10 - 2017
OWASP Top 10 - 2021

Evidence

URL	Evidence
https://arxiv.org/list/math.LO	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
Missing: https://arxiv.org/.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://arxiv.org/	OPTIONS	We did a HTTP OPTIONS request. The server responded with a 200 status code and the header: `Allow: OPTIONS, HEAD, GET` 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

Evidence

URL	Method	Parameters	Evidence
https://arxiv.org/list/math.LO	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 Cookies: arxiv-search-parameters={}	Email Address: help@arxiv.org

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

Infrastructure Vulnerabilities

Evidence

CVE	CVSS	EPSS Score	EPSS Percentile	CISA KEV	Summary
CVE-2023-39663	7.5	0.00188	0.41041	No	Mathjax up to v2.7.9 was discovered to contain two Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) vulnerabilities in MathJax.js via the components pattern and markdownPattern. NOTE: the vendor disputes this because the regular expressions are not applied to user input; thus, there is no risk.
CVE-2018-1999024	4.3	0.00239	0.46989	No	MathJax version prior to version 2.7.4 contains a Cross Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the \unicode{} macro that can result in Potentially untrusted Javascript running within a web browser. This attack appear to be exploitable via The victim must view a page where untrusted content is processed using Mathjax. This vulnerability appears to have been fixed in 2.7.4 and later.

Vulnerability description

Vulnerabilities found for MathJax 2.7.3

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-2023-39663	7.5	0.00188	0.41041	No	Mathjax up to v2.7.9 was discovered to contain two Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) vulnerabilities in MathJax.js via the components pattern and markdownPattern. NOTE: the vendor disputes this because the regular expressions are not applied to user input; thus, there is no risk.
CVE-2018-1999024	4.3	0.00239	0.46989	No	MathJax version prior to version 2.7.4 contains a Cross Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the \unicode{} macro that can result in Potentially untrusted Javascript running within a web browser. This attack appear to be exploitable via The victim must view a page where untrusted content is processed using Mathjax. This vulnerability appears to have been fixed in 2.7.4 and later.

Vulnerability description

Vulnerabilities found for MathJax 2.7.3

Risk description

Recommendation

We recommend you to upgrade the affected software to the latest version in order to eliminate the risks imposed by these vulnerabilities.

Evidence

Domain Queried	DNS Record Type	Description	Value
_dmarc.arxiv.org	TXT	Text record	"v=DMARC1; p=none; rf=afrf; rua=mailto:dmarc-a@abuse.net; ruf=mailto:dmarc-f@abuse.net; psd=n;"

Vulnerability description

We found that the DMARC record for the domain is not configured with sp policy, meaning that no policy is enforced for subdomains. When a DMARC record does not include a subdomain policy (sp directive), subdomains are not explicitly covered by the main domain's DMARC policy. This means that emails sent from subdomains (e.g., sub.example.com) may not be subject to the same DMARC enforcement as the main domain (example.com). As a result, attackers could potentially spoof emails from subdomains without being blocked or flagged, even if the main domain has a strict DMARC policy.

Risk description

Without a subdomain policy (sp directive) in the DMARC record, subdomains are not protected by the same DMARC enforcement as the main domain, leaving them vulnerable to spoofing attacks. This inconsistency can be exploited by attackers to send phishing emails from subdomains, undermining the organization’s overall email security.

Recommendation

To mitigate the risk, we recommend configuring the DMARC record with a subdomain policy by adding the sp=reject or sp=quarantine directive. This will extend DMARC enforcement to all subdomains, preventing spoofing attempts and maintaining consistent security across both the main domain and its subdomains.

Evidence

Domain Queried	DNS Record Type	Description	Value
_dmarc.arxiv.org	TXT	Text record	"v=DMARC1; p=none; rf=afrf; rua=mailto:dmarc-a@abuse.net; ruf=mailto:dmarc-f@abuse.net; psd=n;"

Vulnerability description

We found that the target uses p=none in the DMARC policy. The DMARC policy set to p=none means that the domain owner is not taking any action on emails that fail DMARC validation. This configuration effectively disables enforcement, allowing potentially spoofed or fraudulent emails to be delivered without any additional scrutiny.

Risk description

Emails that fail DMARC checks are still delivered to recipients. This leaves the domain highly vulnerable to email spoofing and phishing attacks, as malicious actors can impersonate the domain without facing any consequences from DMARC enforcement.

Recommendation

We recommend changing the DMARC policy to p=quarantine or, ideally, p=reject to actively block or quarantine emails that fail DMARC validation. This will enhance the security of your domain against spoofing and phishing attacks by ensuring that only legitimate emails are delivered.

Evidence

Domain Queried	DNS Record Type	Description	Value
arxiv.org	A	IPv4 address	151.101.131.42
arxiv.org	A	IPv4 address	151.101.195.42
arxiv.org	A	IPv4 address	151.101.3.42
arxiv.org	A	IPv4 address	151.101.67.42
arxiv.org	NS	Name server	ns-cloud-d2.googledomains.com
arxiv.org	NS	Name server	ns-cloud-d4.googledomains.com
arxiv.org	NS	Name server	ns-cloud-d3.googledomains.com
arxiv.org	NS	Name server	ns-cloud-d1.googledomains.com
arxiv.org	MX	Mail server	5 alt2.aspmx.l.google.com
arxiv.org	MX	Mail server	1 aspmx.l.google.com
arxiv.org	MX	Mail server	10 alt4.aspmx.l.google.com
arxiv.org	MX	Mail server	10 alt3.aspmx.l.google.com
arxiv.org	MX	Mail server	5 alt1.aspmx.l.google.com
arxiv.org	SOA	Start of Authority	ns-cloud-d1.googledomains.com. cloud-dns-hostmaster.google.com. 5 21600 3600 259200 300
arxiv.org	TXT	Text record	"fastly-domain-delegation-hovohwxbihnxkhgs7qud-710479-2023-10-30"
arxiv.org	TXT	Text record	"fastly-domain-delegation-rggipjvqntxvyhcubc49-709999-2023-10-27"
arxiv.org	SPF	Sender Policy Framework	"v=spf1 ip4:128.84.4.0/24 include:salsalabs.org include:_spf.google.com include:servers.mcsv.net include:_spf.qualtrics.com -all"
_dmarc.arxiv.org	TXT	Text record	"v=DMARC1; p=none; rf=afrf; rua=mailto:dmarc-a@abuse.net; ruf=mailto:dmarc-f@abuse.net; psd=n;"

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
MathJax 2.7.3	JavaScript graphics
Varnish	Caching
Google Cloud	IaaS
Apache HTTP Server	Web servers
HSTS	Security
Google Cloud Trace	Performance
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
arxiv.org	SPF	Sender Policy Framework	"v=spf1 ip4:128.84.4.0/24 include:salsalabs.org include:_spf.google.com include:servers.mcsv.net include:_spf.qualtrics.com -all"

Evidence

DKIM selector	Key type	Key size	Value
k2	rsa	1422	"v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAv2aC2KjGKLOwTweBY5A9RpjsxaBXR9r7OAU6U8/zn92ivImI75naUujWbItRI/QmL1jy5PWGqLwoUA0b90ObWaLDc+i9MtTNmGeWO009hr20fIxhGg6XBT2kjZ1DTThopSe1nAndsupmcBwlQ5Q6LJ+ZAxLcujnPIxM0ZBLmgpkv8u6RfY4eFP8OLvdAW3oSu" "B0DyLDigQX4Sj8wBO4YIdQH6AAmBeOsidsKAFNFUCpc3vCxtBDR12U+cBg724l3sBkMQ8evnz6idnqxq9QAVYh8k4kJ+RP+6cqTdy7LjIm8xY/bQNpQIpGUAuDo2DjLcCDun9DAI4Q/3z+Q0o9QuQIDAQAB;"
k3	rsa	1422	"v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAsYGiMSn7fsUqSvfSX40x9R1OlRtbNiCY80lHRIlcKx3XDIR7257aUx+q9CSIARdfTL6KCuLGNFx5g9TgVr6png4ajcieSQGtOehBgxnkDN8aAA5TX0FmFrcefJU0JoxLOF09EKgXxhSSHCk/ekVb0PXSboHXoZ9+EI404F1qhcwXXIgHXTaUthHTut2P6BBZh" "IXIgvDe/w49GchR7MRJqjNb7neEBbYHbgWuBTvvHCg7Gy6m6n9krYK+ROWq3dVvXy9plAGK3ygM+HtjIiMt7arRGMOF0WgDTz7YdN9BGpt6BvXxLnjiQcgS5T9n+cIyPZgiWzDMXNlaEEdKTEKxrwIDAQAB;"

Evidence

Software / Version	Category
MathJax 2.7.3	JavaScript graphics
Varnish	Caching
Google Cloud	IaaS
Apache HTTP Server	Web servers
HSTS	Security
Google Cloud Trace	Performance
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.