Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | Secretariat and Director General | IUCN |
| Description: | IUCN’s headquarters are in Gland, near Geneva, Switzerland, and we have regional, outpost, country and project offices around the world. In addition to contributing knowledge, convening and capacity-building work, the Secretariat manages projects worldwide and coordinates support services to Members and Commissions. |
| ip_address | 104.18.1.194 |
| country | - |
| network_name | Cloudflare, Inc. |
| asn | AS13335 |
| ip_address | 104.18.0.194 |
| 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 | http | cloudflare - |
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Klaro | Cookie compliance |
| jQuery 3.7.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Preact | JavaScript libraries |
| AddToAny | Widgets |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| Cloudflare Bot Management | Security |
| Drupal 10 | CMS |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| HSTS | Security |
| Varnish | Caching |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Klaro | Cookie compliance |
| jQuery 3.7.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Preact | JavaScript libraries |
| AddToAny | Widgets |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| Cloudflare Bot Management | Security |
| Drupal 10 | CMS |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| 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
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://iucn.org/our-union/secretariat-and-director-general | 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
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://iucn.org/our-union/secretariat-and-director-general | OPTIONS | We did a HTTP OPTIONS request. The server responded with a 200 status code and the header: `Allow: GET, POST, DELETE, PATCH` 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
We managed to detect that Drupal has reached the End-of-Life (EOL).
Version detected: 10 End-of-life date: 2023-12-15 Latest version for the cycle: 10.0.11 This release cycle (10.0) doesn't have long-term-support (LTS). The cycle was released on 2022-12-15 and its latest release date was 2023-09-19. The support ended on 2023-06-21.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.iucn.org | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; adkim=r; aspf=r; rua=mailto:svc_dmarc@iucn.org;" |
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
We managed to detect that Drupal has reached the End-of-Life (EOL).
Version detected: 10 End-of-life date: 2023-12-15 Latest version for the cycle: 10.0.11 This release cycle (10.0) doesn't have long-term-support (LTS). The cycle was released on 2022-12-15 and its latest release date was 2023-09-19. The support ended on 2023-06-21.
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 found insecure DNS cookie usage on the following nameservers: jakub.ns.cloudflare.com, saanvi.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.iucn.org | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; adkim=r; aspf=r; rua=mailto:svc_dmarc@iucn.org;" |
Vulnerability description
We found that the target uses p=quarantine in the DMARC policy. When a DMARC policy is set to p=quarantine, emails that fail DMARC validation are delivered but placed in the recipient’s spam or junk folder. Although it offers some protection, this policy is less strict than p=reject, which blocks such emails entirely.
Risk description
While emails failing DMARC validation are sent to the spam folder, users may still retrieve them from there, leading to a higher risk of phishing and spoofing attacks succeeding. Moreover, less strict enforcement may allow more fraudulent emails to reach user inboxes if misclassified.
Recommendation
We recommend considering moving to a stricter policy, such as p=reject, where emails that fail DMARC validation are completely rejected rather than delivered to spam folders. This reduces the risk of users interacting with potentially malicious emails.
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.iucn.org | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; adkim=r; aspf=r; rua=mailto:svc_dmarc@iucn.org;" |
Vulnerability description
We found that the DMARC record for the domain is not configured with ruf tag. A missing ruf (forensic reporting) tag in a DMARC record indicates that the domain owner has not enabled the collection of detailed failure reports. Forensic reports provide valuable insights into specific instances where emails fail DMARC authentication. Without the ruf tag, the domain administrator loses the ability to receive and analyze these reports, making it difficult to investigate individual email failures or identify targeted phishing or spoofing attacks that may be exploiting weaknesses in the email authentication setup.
Risk description
Without forensic reports (ruf), domain owners have limited visibility into the specifics of failed DMARC validation. This means potential malicious activity, such as email spoofing or phishing attempts, might go unnoticed until they result in more significant security breaches or reputational damage. Forensic reports allow for quick response to email abuses by providing detailed information about the failure, including the header information of the emails involved. The absence of this data hampers an organization's ability to identify and mitigate threats targeting its domain, increasing the risk of ongoing spoofing and fraud.
Recommendation
We recommend configuring the ruf tag in the DMARC record. This tag specifies where forensic reports should be sent, providing the domain owner with detailed data on DMARC validation failures. Forensic reports allow administrators to analyze why certain emails failed authentication, making it easier to fine-tune DMARC policies or address potential vulnerabilities. Ensure that the ruf email address belongs to a secure and trusted location capable of handling sensitive email data.
Evidence
We managed to detect that Drupal has reached the End-of-Life (EOL).
Version detected: 10 End-of-life date: 2023-12-15 Latest version for the cycle: 10.0.11 This release cycle (10.0) doesn't have long-term-support (LTS). The cycle was released on 2022-12-15 and its latest release date was 2023-09-19. The support ended on 2023-06-21.
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 Drupal has reached the End-of-Life (EOL).
Version detected: 10 End-of-life date: 2023-12-15 Latest version for the cycle: 10.0.11 This release cycle (10.0) doesn't have long-term-support (LTS). The cycle was released on 2022-12-15 and its latest release date was 2023-09-19. The support ended on 2023-06-21.
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
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Drupal 10 | CMS |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Varnish | Caching |
| Cloudflare Bot Management | Security |
| AddToAny | Widgets |
| Klaro | Cookie compliance |
| jQuery 3.7.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Preact | JavaScript libraries |
| HSTS | Security |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| dkim1 | rsa | 1476 | "k=rsa; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAoPRy5wvNV3InFV1iayDMo2GErTJTdqPYonDR8a0p3moUhx6TQ1OMP7HSi4fhQglGmSld2B0V91xCjQaWSn28+K+yzHV/ufsEZ430w/NpTWK7dzepiCOjI9+RqvZfor/qs7ioF3dhzLuwV0XGTl+A7ACDgAaBRCK0idn2AmG+Kjj/NERu6wDnEPVyWbRA/rQYhmeYjBWb5U" "Z0vwkowQrG0TVcIZaCuCer1p/8w41z883xbWX7v2g37c+EOo+CafBFw/eaC+tD92OCzPCivAdFRbhCsTKUkwGYxa6D7KlaucJjTwfTGzmYRbWThJ3NgQ4GTtb1UPmgQLFpYYavvkPLwQIDAQAB" |
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Drupal 10 | CMS |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Varnish | Caching |
| Klaro | Cookie compliance |
| jQuery 3.7.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Preact | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Cloudflare Bot Management | Security |
| AddToAny | Widgets |
| HSTS | Security |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| 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
| 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 |
|---|---|
| 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 |
|---|---|
| Drupal 10 | CMS |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Varnish | Caching |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| AddToAny | Widgets |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| Cloudflare Bot Management | Security |
| Klaro | Cookie compliance |
| jQuery 3.7.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Preact | JavaScript libraries |
| HSTS | Security |
| 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
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Drupal 10 | CMS |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Varnish | Caching |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Cloudflare Bot Management | Security |
| AddToAny | Widgets |
| HSTS | Security |
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| iucn.org | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 include:spf.messagelabs.com include:_spf.fortimailcloud.com include:spf.protection.outlook.com a:c.spf.service-now.com -all" |
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Drupal 10 | CMS |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Varnish | Caching |
| Cloudflare Bot Management | Security |
| AddToAny | Widgets |
| Klaro | Cookie compliance |
| jQuery 3.7.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Preact | JavaScript libraries |
| HSTS | Security |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| 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
| 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
| Operating System | Accuracy |
|---|---|
| FreeBSD 11.0-STABLE | 91% |
Vulnerability description
OS Detection
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| iucn.org | A | IPv4 address | 104.18.1.194 |
| iucn.org | A | IPv4 address | 104.18.0.194 |
| iucn.org | NS | Name server | jakub.ns.cloudflare.com |
| iucn.org | NS | Name server | saanvi.ns.cloudflare.com |
| iucn.org | MX | Mail server | 5 iucn-org-1.fortimailcloud.com |
| iucn.org | MX | Mail server | 5 iucn-org-2.fortimailcloud.com |
| iucn.org | SOA | Start of Authority | jakub.ns.cloudflare.com. dns.cloudflare.com. 2395186907 10000 2400 604800 1800 |
| iucn.org | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2606:4700::6812:c2 |
| iucn.org | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2606:4700::6812:1c2 |
| iucn.org | TXT | Text record | "Foxit-domain-verification=d1154162d3ee1f3ccae94a9bf79c615d" |
| iucn.org | TXT | Text record | "MS=DACC4CA42D2D40CBE9E1C3130D5DD4F84620BD4E" |
| iucn.org | TXT | Text record | "MS=ms30583989" |
| iucn.org | TXT | Text record | "RQtdcwF4VIcBYHbj+q1T3K95EGIsW1OnBb2NhQJnvL6KQDlCO/qnrVflhRcq2YLnqAWulXdeJaYIY4De1Z6//Q==" |
| iucn.org | TXT | Text record | "amazonses:mGryBZDFZYRqZQI/1BfUv4FWXMAhGLFVSSFxU0ZKolU=" |
| iucn.org | TXT | Text record | "docusign=5d63510a-3ae4-4c8f-bec6-c7f9c897e02d" |
| iucn.org | TXT | Text record | "facebook-domain-verification=a59fkk76l0au6n24p97c0uyq4gdrho" |
| iucn.org | TXT | Text record | "google-gws-recovery-domain-verification=50845260" |
| iucn.org | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=3iMsBKC9v7mEGm4QOn7vERsrL2upOBmSseSUcps8oCU" |
| iucn.org | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=5DWfkCQIiw37jpR7qqeJZnZdMdNch-AqYKhcSFk9Cqw" |
| iucn.org | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=OV7Xnus54pa0f4fQGpbTfXahkQlVmt94SIMcCC-pzxY" |
| iucn.org | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=brCTMqiuWYKLubprLOTdZFP5qRpTOFxqhkbM-WA7YwE" |
| iucn.org | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=q7ycHYhjHzxHywH7rx-T5QR47Ryj1ZKpqxHgBetI_kg" |
| iucn.org | TXT | Text record | "wcel" |
| iucn.org | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 include:spf.messagelabs.com include:_spf.fortimailcloud.com include:spf.protection.outlook.com a:c.spf.service-now.com -all" |
| _dmarc.iucn.org | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; adkim=r; aspf=r; rua=mailto:svc_dmarc@iucn.org;" |
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.