Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | Anti-Detect Browser for Multi-Accounting - Incogniton |
| Description: | Anti-detect browser that helps you remain anonymous online. Manage multiple accounts and profiles in an easy-to-use interface. |
| ip_address | 172.67.149.50 |
| country | - |
| network_name | Cloudflare Inc |
| asn | AS13335 |
| ip_address | 104.21.55.162 |
| 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 |
|---|---|
| AngularJS | JavaScript frameworks |
| BetterDocs | Documentation |
| BetterDocs plugin | WordPress plugins |
| Clipboard.js | JavaScript libraries |
| Contact Form 7 6.1.2 | WordPress plugins, Form builders |
| Magnific Popup 0.08942400 | JavaScript libraries |
| Elementor 3.32.1 | Page builders, WordPress plugins |
| Facebook Pixel 2.9.241 | Analytics |
| Bootstrap | UI frameworks |
| jQuery Migrate 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Analytics | Analytics |
| HTTP/3 | Miscellaneous |
| imagesLoaded 5.0.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery | JavaScript libraries |
| Slick | JavaScript libraries |
| Typed.js 0.08946200 | JavaScript libraries |
| MySQL | Databases |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| OWL Carousel | JavaScript libraries |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| React 18.3.1 | JavaScript frameworks |
| Redux Framework 4.5.7 | WordPress plugins |
| Stripe | Payment processors |
| Swiper | JavaScript libraries |
| Priority Hints | Performance |
| WooCommerce 10.2.2 | Ecommerce, WordPress plugins |
| WooCommerce Stripe Payment Gateway | WordPress plugins |
| WordPress 6.8.3 | CMS, Blogs |
| WooCommerce Multilingual 5.5.2.3 | WordPress plugins, Translation |
| WP Rocket | Caching, WordPress plugins |
| WPML 4.8.4 | WordPress plugins, Translation |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| Cloudflare Turnstile | Security |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| JivoChat | Live chat |
| jsDelivr | CDN |
| Lodash 1.13.7 | JavaScript libraries |
| RSS | Miscellaneous |
| Sendinblue | Marketing automation, Email |
| Wordfence Login Security 1.1.15 | WordPress plugins, Security |
| Yoast SEO 26.3 | SEO, WordPress plugins |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| URL | Cookie Name | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| https://incogniton.com/ | wcml_client_currency, wcml_client_currency_language, wcml_client_country | The server responded with Set-Cookie header(s) that does not specify the HttpOnly flag: Set-Cookie: wcml_client_currency=USD Set-Cookie: wcml_client_currency_language=en Set-Cookie: wcml_client_country=GB |
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
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://incogniton.com/ | 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
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| AngularJS | JavaScript frameworks |
| BetterDocs | Documentation |
| BetterDocs plugin | WordPress plugins |
| Clipboard.js | JavaScript libraries |
| Contact Form 7 6.1.2 | WordPress plugins, Form builders |
| Magnific Popup 0.08942400 | JavaScript libraries |
| Elementor 3.32.1 | Page builders, WordPress plugins |
| Facebook Pixel 2.9.241 | Analytics |
| Bootstrap | UI frameworks |
| jQuery Migrate 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Analytics | Analytics |
| HTTP/3 | Miscellaneous |
| imagesLoaded 5.0.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery | JavaScript libraries |
| Slick | JavaScript libraries |
| Typed.js 0.08946200 | JavaScript libraries |
| MySQL | Databases |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| OWL Carousel | JavaScript libraries |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| React 18.3.1 | JavaScript frameworks |
| Redux Framework 4.5.7 | WordPress plugins |
| Stripe | Payment processors |
| Swiper | JavaScript libraries |
| Priority Hints | Performance |
| WooCommerce 10.2.2 | Ecommerce, WordPress plugins |
| WooCommerce Stripe Payment Gateway | WordPress plugins |
| WordPress 6.8.3 | CMS, Blogs |
| WooCommerce Multilingual 5.5.2.3 | WordPress plugins, Translation |
| WP Rocket | Caching, WordPress plugins |
| WPML 4.8.4 | WordPress plugins, Translation |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| Cloudflare Turnstile | Security |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| JivoChat | Live chat |
| jsDelivr | CDN |
| Lodash 1.13.7 | JavaScript libraries |
| RSS | Miscellaneous |
| Sendinblue | Marketing automation, Email |
| Wordfence Login Security 1.1.15 | WordPress plugins, Security |
| Yoast SEO 26.3 | SEO, WordPress plugins |
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://incogniton.com/ | Response headers do not include the Referrer-Policy HTTP security header as well as the |
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 |
|---|---|
| https://incogniton.com/ | 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 | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://incogniton.com/ | 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
Vulnerability description
Website is accessible.
Infrastructure Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | CISA KEV | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2019-20891 | 8.8 | 0.0013 | 0.33438 | No | WooCommerce before 3.6.5, when it handles CSV imports of products, has a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) issue with resultant stored cross-site scripting (XSS) via includes/admin/importers/class-wc-product-csv-importer-controller.php. |
| CVE-2017-18356 | 8.8 | 0.01567 | 0.8097 | No | In the Automattic WooCommerce plugin before 3.2.4 for WordPress, an attack is possible after gaining access to the target site with a user account that has at least Shop manager privileges. The attacker then constructs a specifically crafted string that will turn into a PHP object injection involving the includes/shortcodes/class-wc-shortcode-products.php WC_Shortcode_Products::get_products() use of cached queries within shortcodes. |
| CVE-2018-20714 | 8.1 | 0.00727 | 0.71954 | No | The logging system of the Automattic WooCommerce plugin before 3.4.6 for WordPress is vulnerable to a File Deletion vulnerability. This allows deletion of woocommerce.php, which leads to certain privilege checks not being in place, and therefore a shop manager can escalate privileges to admin. |
| CVE-2025-5062 | 6.1 | 0.00234 | 0.46271 | No | The WooCommerce plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to PostMessage-Based Cross-Site Scripting via the 'customize-store' page in all versions up to, and including, 9.4.2 due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping on PostMessage data. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to inject arbitrary web scripts in pages that execute if they can successfully trick a user into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| CVE-2019-9168 | 6.1 | 0.00247 | 0.48026 | No | WooCommerce before 3.5.5 allows XSS via a Photoswipe caption. |
Vulnerability description
Vulnerabilities found for WooCommerce 1.2
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
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.incogniton.com | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:8153b7b4d1654ace96f590b094184294@dmarc-reports.cloudflare.net" |
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
| DKIM selector | Key type | Key size | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| default | rsa | 1422 | "v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAutCHAdyI6EfAqO3FFOFjz4bvcb4w55+llbeu8RekgKiapekZzdYa38tG3PlL+Jk73VLJ/54fEykwZnPZ//AaMUvnicBTYLvxDMymCT4tJ7yTOImWlNZT51ymhwc52wnBJGAGuQsBToup5eqGgUFWVGupZMnzv2zt4CK8lZOXWtmSN3yF0LZgyx2aaMDyy6g9z" " YBrMNPrsP9uXSUYj7WGHDxkyVQ23n2vv/BGPeufsJ5BaB7aVVWOsfP4SPAskdNswF4tnQpFu13lezLnNmASJhQbnibTAF+3n+GJT02nDdrJxnxL2cF9UeTcdotzY2yk9XUWO4mJSDLjncgEv8KPiQIDAQAB;" |
| rsa | 1296 | "k=rsa;p=MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDeMVIzrCa3T14JsNY0IRv5/2V1/v2itlviLQBwXsa7shBD6TrBkswsFUToPyMRWC9tbR/5ey0nRBH0ZVxp+lsmTxid2Y2z+FApQ6ra2VsXfbJP3HE6wAO0YTVEJt1TmeczhEd2Jiz/fcabIISgXEdSpTYJhb0ct0VJRxcg4c8c7wIDAQAB" |
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 found insecure DNS cookie usage on the following nameservers: nitin.ns.cloudflare.com, val.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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| incogniton.com | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 ip4:142.251.2.27 ip4:54.240.0.0/18 ip4:66.102.0.0/20 ip4:74.125.0.0/16 ip4:69.57.160.23 ip4:69.57.160.23 ip4:66.29.147.117 ip4:199.192.21.79 ip4:198.54.114.35 ip4:172.64.206.29 ip4:172.64.207.29 ip4:35.191.0.0/16 ip4:54.240.64.0/19 ip4:54.240.96.0/" "19 ip4:52.82.172.0/22 ip4:66.249.80.0/20 ip4:72.14.192.0/18 ip4:108.177.8.0/21 ip4:173.194.0.0/16 ip4:172.217.0.0/19 ip4:130.211.0.0/22 ip4:185.41.28.0/22 include:_spf0000000.incogniton.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
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.incogniton.com | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:8153b7b4d1654ace96f590b094184294@dmarc-reports.cloudflare.net" |
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
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| 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 |
| 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 |
| 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
| DKIM selector | Key type | Key size | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| default | rsa | 1422 | "v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAutCHAdyI6EfAqO3FFOFjz4bvcb4w55+llbeu8RekgKiapekZzdYa38tG3PlL+Jk73VLJ/54fEykwZnPZ//AaMUvnicBTYLvxDMymCT4tJ7yTOImWlNZT51ymhwc52wnBJGAGuQsBToup5eqGgUFWVGupZMnzv2zt4CK8lZOXWtmSN3yF0LZgyx2aaMDyy6g9z" " YBrMNPrsP9uXSUYj7WGHDxkyVQ23n2vv/BGPeufsJ5BaB7aVVWOsfP4SPAskdNswF4tnQpFu13lezLnNmASJhQbnibTAF+3n+GJT02nDdrJxnxL2cF9UeTcdotzY2yk9XUWO4mJSDLjncgEv8KPiQIDAQAB;" |
| rsa | 1422 | "v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAhfuve4kuKLM4gfBq1Uk7aHoRsiU6k6SRj6lagfyoy8pgtqozmh64UYLHhgQWEGjz1kPEMyxdlHsUpRkxG/smd7WN1cB1Sxp90rdQAJ39ZDdtQ2iCgag1h4kz12BbndJAbPOd3aXLWbCXpxfBjpzaLJoECnAyFABcfytbKSqMqD23ze8kGRjx26VwPKv3nMCLp" "C20HdiWgNZ5e6F9lgxFUzE9MwIbxrh66s4QqlWVVIH10qMJONQd1D3tmZedaZ71LyFydqoFLWBt/s310oKJY928D5u3P8tSnHctbeHQb+rOxMCAbXUI8YoE2OVfwMEz3sT22CksibvkyqNvL7VzBwIDAQAB" | |
| rsa | 1296 | "k=rsa;p=MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDeMVIzrCa3T14JsNY0IRv5/2V1/v2itlviLQBwXsa7shBD6TrBkswsFUToPyMRWC9tbR/5ey0nRBH0ZVxp+lsmTxid2Y2z+FApQ6ra2VsXfbJP3HE6wAO0YTVEJt1TmeczhEd2Jiz/fcabIISgXEdSpTYJhb0ct0VJRxcg4c8c7wIDAQAB" | |
| s1 | rsa | 1446 | "k=rsa; t=s; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAy4WqVF/GQSMSfipihEfARVqUUd/aNNmUCbDDJyPFPlYXeqKIu0uESi8w/BiwZTg6TZfxaazd3XZ+VkHUp1NM8ZoIS3HvOi2yKduApvtrnfbWyzPu0I/ul8GiyNDCXPWlHGo286BbtR0uhGsotnl6qbjLuGWYSA4QIv2V468BpQyNcfhSOnArkyAYurq4/HpraMG0n" "9529xbzVz4NFcsXrTfZborP460GFnUtrzkZZi+5ciVcNiaLvqiVkt6U1R0Eb/N12sAZLoPOxwhMzmxX49uSAnv8kZVay/KkF9xvEeMmUQBs/9vK0aZkf8+bPxHU2voIzheVj9V1tZfth5pEBQIDAQAB" |
| s2 | rsa | 1446 | "k=rsa; t=s; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAu4SNr9RliPX3sPNehtUkW/GHuTpI8bJAb4eATthQZ6nYSJxIUxVEDIvRRFcXPJD67EYROwfU8+HugNVgYtQgiOmHQWaHZKZ7bkr+CssA2KO1PdF/lmQyOOxVmfs8hAqlRPSagtpd9FD2nSDze/POFUK1o/1fvY2Mz9cftydhjQbotQEYwT9vZXpdIs0DR5nkBxZrQ" "RkSI57TQbCSph+8cGYdl0RCsyaHTERuF2P9KVkDRp6Ggt24pwFYF/Bx1adIQXiU5/+dMQwBFVFy+PffVQPvMkbTroV1iR7nfEsQCN3xqmLrj3AYA0x1G8jTRzvYBeanyfvqFA+eN99N3SswFQIDAQAB" |
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| incogniton.com | A | IPv4 address | 172.67.149.50 |
| incogniton.com | A | IPv4 address | 104.21.55.162 |
| incogniton.com | NS | Name server | nitin.ns.cloudflare.com |
| incogniton.com | NS | Name server | val.ns.cloudflare.com |
| incogniton.com | MX | Mail server | 1 aspmx.l.google.com |
| incogniton.com | MX | Mail server | 2 mail.incogniton.com |
| incogniton.com | SOA | Start of Authority | nitin.ns.cloudflare.com. dns.cloudflare.com. 2387081538 10000 2400 604800 1800 |
| incogniton.com | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2606:4700:3030::6815:37a2 |
| incogniton.com | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2606:4700:3035::ac43:9532 |
| incogniton.com | TXT | Text record | "MS=C715FC777B6241005CF324E5055A3F0539246C1C" |
| incogniton.com | TXT | Text record | "Sendinblue-code:e3e684b499cf8084c606fab1925984e9" |
| incogniton.com | TXT | Text record | "brevo-code:e3e684b499cf8084c606fab1925984e9" |
| incogniton.com | TXT | Text record | "cryptomus=577908ca" |
| incogniton.com | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=YMTeEBiC-pIar9f965FS2F1GMK1XKqLUlF7VQYjLQhk" |
| incogniton.com | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=oY2oDgFXOHJkzDL93UiAqp8p-fLUxPwumaBT835pxkI" |
| incogniton.com | TXT | Text record | "relate=5f12b0a7-7394-4322-bbe4-ac6985cfa940" |
| incogniton.com | TXT | Text record | "yandex-verification: 385afd3435d92531" |
| incogniton.com | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 ip4:142.251.2.27 ip4:54.240.0.0/18 ip4:66.102.0.0/20 ip4:74.125.0.0/16 ip4:69.57.160.23 ip4:69.57.160.23 ip4:66.29.147.117 ip4:199.192.21.79 ip4:198.54.114.35 ip4:172.64.206.29 ip4:172.64.207.29 ip4:35.191.0.0/16 ip4:54.240.64.0/19 ip4:54.240.96.0/" "19 ip4:52.82.172.0/22 ip4:66.249.80.0/20 ip4:72.14.192.0/18 ip4:108.177.8.0/21 ip4:173.194.0.0/16 ip4:172.217.0.0/19 ip4:130.211.0.0/22 ip4:185.41.28.0/22 include:_spf0000000.incogniton.com ~all" |
| _dmarc.incogniton.com | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:8153b7b4d1654ace96f590b094184294@dmarc-reports.cloudflare.net" |
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 |
|---|---|
| cPanel | Hosting panels |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| 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 |
|---|---|
| WordPress | CMS, Blogs |
| BetterDocs | Documentation |
| MySQL | Databases |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Bootstrap | UI frameworks |
| Contact Form 7 6.1.2 | WordPress plugins, Form builders |
| Stripe | Payment processors |
| Yoast SEO Premium 26.3 | SEO |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| HTTP/3 | Miscellaneous |
| WooCommerce 1.2 | Ecommerce, WordPress plugins |
| BetterDocs plugin | WordPress plugins |
| WooCommerce Stripe Payment Gateway | WordPress plugins |
| Wordfence Login Security 1.1.15 | WordPress plugins, Security |
| Underscore.js 1.13.7 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery Migrate 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery | JavaScript libraries |
| imagesLoaded 5.0.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| Clipboard.js | JavaScript libraries |
| WP Rocket | Caching, WordPress plugins |
| Redux Framework 4.5.7 | WordPress plugins |
| Elementor 3.32.1 | Page builders, WordPress plugins |
| Yoast SEO 26.3 | SEO, WordPress plugins |
| WPML 4.8.4 | WordPress plugins, Translation |
| OWL Carousel | JavaScript libraries |
| Magnific Popup 0.99562400 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Typed.js 0.31700400 | JavaScript libraries |
| Slick | JavaScript libraries |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| jsDelivr | CDN |
| JivoChat | Live chat |
| WooCommerce Multilingual 5.5.2.3 | WordPress plugins, Translation |
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-RELEASE | 91% |
Vulnerability description
OS Detection