Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | NMC Hospitals and Clinics – A Leading Healthcare Provider in the UAE |
| Description: | NMC Hospitals and Clinics is a leading healthcare provider in the UAE, offering expert doctors and advanced care across Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Sharjah, Ajman, Ras Al Khaimah and Al Ain. |
| ip_address | 104.26.8.181 |
| country | - |
| network_name | Cloudflare, Inc. |
| asn | AS13335 |
| ip_address | 104.26.9.181 |
| country | - |
| network_name | Cloudflare, Inc. |
| asn | AS13335 |
| ip_address | 172.67.75.195 |
| country | - |
| network_name | Cloudflare, Inc. |
| asn | AS13335 |
80/tcp | http | Cloudflare http proxy - |
443/tcp | https | cloudflare - |
2082/tcp | http | Cloudflare http proxy - |
2083/tcp | https | nginx - |
2086/tcp | http | Cloudflare http proxy - |
2087/tcp | https | nginx - |
8080/tcp | http | Cloudflare http proxy - |
8443/tcp | https-alt | cloudflare - |
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Alpine.js 3.15.4 | JavaScript frameworks |
| Amazon Web Services | PaaS |
| Amazon S3 | CDN |
| cdnjs | CDN |
| jQuery CDN | CDN |
| Facebook Pixel 2.9.345 | Analytics |
| Font Awesome 7.0.1 | Font scripts |
| Bootstrap 5.0.2 | UI frameworks |
| core-js 3.32.2 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Analytics GA4 | Analytics |
| HTTP/3 | Miscellaneous |
| jQuery 3.7.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Livewire | Web frameworks, Miscellaneous |
| Laravel | Web frameworks |
| MySQL | Databases |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| OWL Carousel | JavaScript libraries |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Popper | Miscellaneous |
| DoubleClick Floodlight | Advertising |
| Priority Hints | Performance |
| WordPress | CMS, Blogs |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| HSTS | Security |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Alpine.js 3.15.4 | JavaScript frameworks |
| Amazon Web Services | PaaS |
| Amazon S3 | CDN |
| cdnjs | CDN |
| jQuery CDN | CDN |
| Facebook Pixel 2.9.345 | Analytics |
| Font Awesome 7.0.1 | Font scripts |
| Bootstrap 5.0.2 | UI frameworks |
| core-js 3.32.2 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Analytics GA4 | Analytics |
| HTTP/3 | Miscellaneous |
| jQuery 3.7.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Livewire | Web frameworks, Miscellaneous |
| Laravel | Web frameworks |
| MySQL | Databases |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| OWL Carousel | JavaScript libraries |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Popper | Miscellaneous |
| DoubleClick Floodlight | Advertising |
| Priority Hints | Performance |
| WordPress | CMS, Blogs |
| 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.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-200 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://nmc.ae/en | 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-1021 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
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).
Evidence
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.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-1188 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| URL | Method | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| https://nmc.ae/en | OPTIONS | We did a HTTP OPTIONS request. The server responded with a 200 status code and the header: `Allow: GET,HEAD` Request / Response |
Vulnerability description
We have noticed that the webserver responded with an Allow HTTP header when an OPTIONS HTTP request was sent. This method responds to requests by providing information about the methods available for the target resource.
Risk description
The only risk this might present nowadays is revealing debug HTTP methods that can be used on the server. This can present a danger if any of those methods can lead to sensitive information, like authentication information, secret keys.
Recommendation
We recommend that you check for unused HTTP methods or even better, disable the OPTIONS method. This can be done using your webserver configuration.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-16 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Infrastructure Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| nmc.ae | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 include:spf.protection.outlook.com +ip4:54.229.2.165 +ip4:52.30.130.201 +ip4:149.72.191.205 +ip4:168.245.79.149 +ip4:23.249.219.55 +ip4:23.249.219.56 include:spf-006a7603.pphosted.com include:spf-006a7602.pphosted.com include:spf_" "c.oraclecloud.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: derek.ns.cloudflare.com, kira.ns.cloudflare.com
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
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.nmc.ae | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=reject; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc-reports@nmc.ae; ruf=mailto:dmarc-reports@nmc.ae" |
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
| Operating System | Accuracy |
|---|---|
| FreeBSD 11.0-RELEASE | 91% |
Vulnerability description
OS Detection
Evidence
| DKIM selector | Key type | Key size | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| s1 | rsa | 1446 | "k=rsa; t=s; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAtfJ/vceN2R2Qe2uVPKyTT89S7S3dAFaSHJ92cpUGKmspBmHzRQ6/uYRQ1cgvQSsz8nRjQJFA+7eaW8OGKzoJpHfdYva0OlooVjbnNLODJu6qS02zD3WP5gQ2DBQBrYZPBk/jd5fFB9BrEEFE6+NlD8bIs3z/H8i486WTj/rMgnsbT+WQyKYjgII9sHzyB6GrsB4OI" "5VM9GsQ1SfAsyjhaD2VTBFxoDH9UG/By0pipjAmvHOwILbKDCh649zurAGFDCfu/0dXUIW0Awrdj4OcFmZ0xNHrjziUzKkXlEVEJ4IgQieoeIhcuKxgTvEzzIzhO9G7JkEVo5PXPG5m9DyWMwIDAQAB" |
| s2 | rsa | 1296 | "k=rsa; t=s; p=MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDALZqP51bd2hTQPiEVPQrIHQfkDqq/a6cRW+B8TI89B4/CxqUfLKIukqDz5DFniv6+dQ60y6NgRXNIkxPxIdxY27M/jtBVHw7RDTnKQiaNtK5mTJ92e8o5eJJzNkRGk+YrmZd1g7oZx91+5G5iRtvZIdvrq1VS2ogXHbj/9Trk5QIDAQAB" |
| s12 | rsa | 1446 | "k=rsa; t=s; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEA2sUJWZBtQogD+eEQC0vTRBFiMW0zPz0LiGVSSJ32pgakeAeWBSNjT6xdDaxVnE8s9MUAz+SsUdTW4OZCI3F758hwsGVmVD7ff0Kg9TEARPqqDubKwMXOKAuH3pYxXkh4E5dvrRK34H+QezKtAIl6z8qJiT5VR1AMw6JbpJ/iSk6XBuy3UlycCjKIPt0PBDKh+YRdR" "v2R0JVGbOsTmhUneA44dKsOVod2dQ2InnIvLwYmCfVlvyYzJsA8HihZV2oDCcs3fpNGFBb1MFnzXVVS9iMRK2jrHyGNpxsEdGbYiCr9As9wOJxOoqFH8Gvq70U7CY7hcrQwI3hgAd1vGODtZQIDAQAB" |
| selector1 | rsa | 1422 | "v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAt4qQz0eLyFJbGp5CDtTctgYXeQCIzFodZsXg5g6AZhBsrfHMh9bqXkrAPskimWKoQReMFZx4iIyH/LmWb8rLgUrZzQRyYdwBv8NWQC+gYd+irrvT1ntr6IoRP9HR5isg3wjykMBzc9xAwQTE7pALjAo893PzC3VA0X1N0kyeIRVGRj+hY2GtgKJyPyi4i32/D" "MgUjS8wMusH2849DAw5g6r6bPLF3MJ2/7qDXLPzfOa1qEfq6k0f0Rpoh4057KuWe4LuOqiH+0Bv2kIZB5PqPW0HBR7Hju3AMrjFClAzYQo1Mq/DM3JRx78u+Pw4DkEiSLDkbWuSKr/O/gXtqxjC2QIDAQAB;" |
| selector2 | rsa | 1296 | "v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDH4jkuJ1iQdO6FTzqnld/NhdckaZ6H0TUM54htuy853u4VcNEXQgEW7BGefCuCk8FrHCcZt3M4ZSoMzYpatGJ0YgM617K1bLxroUifOIcOinPlmCQXcGVYECzkvk4hiNjnNnKigcF+PScvRsAQJvG9sPNeYWR3WBfkjX3NMBCfVQIDAQAB;" |
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Cloudflare | CDN |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| nmc.ae | A | IPv4 address | 104.26.9.181 |
| nmc.ae | A | IPv4 address | 104.26.8.181 |
| nmc.ae | A | IPv4 address | 172.67.75.195 |
| nmc.ae | NS | Name server | derek.ns.cloudflare.com |
| nmc.ae | NS | Name server | kira.ns.cloudflare.com |
| nmc.ae | MX | Mail server | 10 mxa-006a7603.gslb.pphosted.com |
| nmc.ae | MX | Mail server | 10 mxb-006a7603.gslb.pphosted.com |
| nmc.ae | SOA | Start of Authority | derek.ns.cloudflare.com. dns.cloudflare.com. 2406348365 10000 2400 604800 1800 |
| nmc.ae | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2606:4700:20::681a:9b5 |
| nmc.ae | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2606:4700:20::ac43:4bc3 |
| nmc.ae | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2606:4700:20::681a:8b5 |
| nmc.ae | TXT | Text record | "atlassian-domain-verification=Xr/cVjHzguFKXd9Bl9TBrHUOlIXA4iijhQKrsBD2OhYLmvhQqcgmN/K/U6jkXug7" |
| nmc.ae | TXT | Text record | "docusign=5f9cd9d8-d54c-44a4-a1ef-d7582059010d" |
| nmc.ae | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=qWbzCvoyG2Low2fL53vxxOKqiNqtD6tM7dbEZL7roik" |
| nmc.ae | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 include:spf.protection.outlook.com +ip4:54.229.2.165 +ip4:52.30.130.201 +ip4:149.72.191.205 +ip4:168.245.79.149 +ip4:23.249.219.55 +ip4:23.249.219.56 include:spf-006a7603.pphosted.com include:spf-006a7602.pphosted.com include:spf_" "c.oraclecloud.com ~all" |
| _dmarc.nmc.ae | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=reject; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc-reports@nmc.ae; ruf=mailto:dmarc-reports@nmc.ae" |
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 |
|---|---|
| Cloudflare | CDN |
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 |
|---|---|
| WordPress | CMS, Blogs |
| MySQL | Databases |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Laravel | Web frameworks |
| Bootstrap 5.0.2 | UI frameworks |
| Amazon Web Services | PaaS |
| Alpine.js 3.15.4 | JavaScript frameworks |
| Priority Hints | Performance |
| jQuery CDN | CDN |
| Cloudflare Browser Insights | Analytics, RUM |
| jQuery 3.7.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Google Analytics GA4 | Analytics |
| Facebook Pixel 2.9.345 | Analytics |
| core-js 3.32.2 | JavaScript libraries |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| OWL Carousel | JavaScript libraries |
| Font Awesome 7.0.1 | Font scripts |
| cdnjs | CDN |
| DoubleClick Floodlight | Advertising |
| Amazon S3 | CDN |
| HSTS | Security |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| Popper | Miscellaneous |
| Livewire | Web frameworks, Miscellaneous |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| HTTP/3 | 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
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Cloudflare | CDN |
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.