Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | Lunacleaningservices – Cleaning Services |
| Description: | No description found |
| ip_address | 212.85.29.61 |
| country | US  |
| network_name | - |
| asn | - |
21/tcp | ftp | ProFTPD or KnFTPD - |
80/tcp | http | LiteSpeed httpd - |
443/tcp | https | LiteSpeed httpd - |
3306/tcp | mysql | - - |
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Clipboard.js | JavaScript libraries |
| Contact Form 7 6.1 | WordPress plugins, Form builders |
| Magnific Popup 1.0.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| Elementor 3.31.1 | Page builders, WordPress plugins |
| Bootstrap | UI frameworks |
| jQuery Migrate 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Font API | Font scripts |
| HTTP/3 | Miscellaneous |
| jQuery | JavaScript libraries |
| Slick | JavaScript libraries |
| ProgressBar.js 1.0.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| LiteSpeed | Web servers |
| Google Maps | Maps |
| MySQL | Databases |
| prettyPhoto | JavaScript libraries |
| OWL Carousel | JavaScript libraries |
| PHP 8.2.29 | Programming languages |
| Redux Framework 4.5.7 | WordPress plugins |
| Smash Balloon Instagram Feed | WordPress plugins |
| spin.js 2.0.1 | JavaScript graphics |
| Underscore.js 1.13.7 | JavaScript libraries |
| Priority Hints | Performance |
| WooCommerce 10.3.4 | Ecommerce, WordPress plugins |
| WordPress 6.8.3 | CMS, Blogs |
| Instagram Feed for WordPress | Widgets, WordPress plugins |
| WOW 1.0.0 | JavaScript frameworks, Web frameworks, JavaScript graphics |
| Hostinger | Hosting |
| RSS | Miscellaneous |
| Slider Revolution 6.6.20 | Widgets, Photo galleries |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| URL | Cookie Name | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| https://lunacleaningservice.com/ | PHPSESSID | The server responded with Set-Cookie header(s) that does not specify the HttpOnly flag: Set-Cookie: PHPSESSID=gn2c9n5f5pltbketof59fl37u6 |
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
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://lunacleaningservice.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://lunacleaningservice.com/ | 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
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://lunacleaningservice.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
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Clipboard.js | JavaScript libraries |
| Contact Form 7 6.1 | WordPress plugins, Form builders |
| Magnific Popup 1.0.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| Elementor 3.31.1 | Page builders, WordPress plugins |
| Bootstrap | UI frameworks |
| jQuery Migrate 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Font API | Font scripts |
| HTTP/3 | Miscellaneous |
| jQuery | JavaScript libraries |
| Slick | JavaScript libraries |
| ProgressBar.js 1.0.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| LiteSpeed | Web servers |
| Google Maps | Maps |
| MySQL | Databases |
| prettyPhoto | JavaScript libraries |
| OWL Carousel | JavaScript libraries |
| PHP 8.2.29 | Programming languages |
| Redux Framework 4.5.7 | WordPress plugins |
| Smash Balloon Instagram Feed | WordPress plugins |
| spin.js 2.0.1 | JavaScript graphics |
| Underscore.js 1.13.7 | JavaScript libraries |
| Priority Hints | Performance |
| WooCommerce 10.3.4 | Ecommerce, WordPress plugins |
| WordPress 6.8.3 | CMS, Blogs |
| Instagram Feed for WordPress | Widgets, WordPress plugins |
| WOW 1.0.0 | JavaScript frameworks, Web frameworks, JavaScript graphics |
| Hostinger | Hosting |
| RSS | Miscellaneous |
| Slider Revolution 6.6.20 | Widgets, Photo galleries |
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://lunacleaningservice.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
| URL | Method | Parameters | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| https://lunacleaningservice.com/wp-json/oembed/1.0/embed | GET | Query: url=https://lunacleaningservice.com/ 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: PHPSESSID=b82s5qdabfsjdnsfoauuvbkra5 | Possible API endpoint found at |
Vulnerability description
We found API endpoints while crawling the given web application.
Risk description
These endpoints may represent an attack surface for malicious actors interested in API-specific vulnerabilities.
Recommendation
Use the API Scanner to perform a more thorough vulnerability check for these endpoints, if an API specification is present.
Evidence
| URL | Method | Parameters | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| https://lunacleaningservice.com/ | 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 | Email Address: lunacleaning.info@gmail.com |
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 |
Vulnerability description
We have noticed that the server is missing the security.txt file, which is considered a good practice for web security. It provides a standardized way for security researchers and the public to report security vulnerabilities or concerns by outlining the preferred method of contact and reporting procedures.
Risk description
There is no particular risk in not having a security.txt file for your server. However, this file is important because it offers a designated channel for reporting vulnerabilities and security issues.
Recommendation
We recommend you to implement the security.txt file according to the standard, in order to allow researchers or users report any security issues they find, improving the defensive mechanisms of your server.
Infrastructure Vulnerabilities
Evidence
We managed to detect a publicly accessible File Transfer Protocol (FTP) service. PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION 21/tcp open ftp ProFTPD or KnFTPD
Vulnerability description
We found that the File Transfer Protocol (FTP) service is publicly accessible. The FTP enables client systems to connect to upload and download files. Nonetheless, FTP lacks encryption for the data exchanged between the server and the client, leaving all transferred data exposed in plaintext.
Risk description
Exposing this service online can enable attackers to execute man-in-the-middle attacks, capturing sensitive user credentials and the contents of files because FTP operates without encryption. The entirety of the communication between the client and the server remains unsecured in plaintext. This acquired information could further facilitate additional attacks within the network.
Recommendation
We recommend turning off FTP access over the Internet and instead using a Virtual Private Network (VPN) that mandates two-factor authentication (2FA). If the FTP service is essential for business purposes, we recommend limiting access only from designated IP addresses using a firewall. Furthermore, utilizing SFTP (Secure File Transfer Protocol) is recommended as this protocol employs encryption to secure data transfers.
Evidence
We found insecure DNS cookie usage on the following nameservers: ns2.dns-parking.com, ns1.dns-parking.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
| Operating System | Accuracy |
|---|---|
| Linux 5.0 - 5.4 | 100% |
Vulnerability description
OS Detection
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| WordPress 6.8.3 | CMS, Blogs |
| Slider Revolution 6.6.20 | Widgets, Photo galleries |
| MySQL | Databases |
| PHP 8.2.29 | Programming languages |
| spin.js 2.0.1 | JavaScript graphics |
| WOW 1.0.0 | JavaScript frameworks, Web frameworks, JavaScript graphics |
| Bootstrap | UI frameworks |
| Contact Form 7 6.1 | WordPress plugins, Form builders |
| LiteSpeed | Web servers |
| Redux Framework 4.5.7 | WordPress plugins |
| WooCommerce 10.3.4 | Ecommerce, WordPress plugins |
| Smash Balloon Instagram Feed | WordPress plugins |
| Elementor 3.31.1 | Page builders, WordPress plugins |
| Instagram Feed for WordPress | Widgets, WordPress plugins |
| Slick | JavaScript libraries |
| Underscore.js 1.13.7 | JavaScript libraries |
| prettyPhoto | JavaScript libraries |
| ProgressBar.js 1.0.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| OWL Carousel | JavaScript libraries |
| Magnific Popup 1.0.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery Migrate 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery | JavaScript libraries |
| Hostinger | Hosting |
| HTTP/3 | Miscellaneous |
| Clipboard.js | JavaScript libraries |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| lunacleaningservice.com | A | IPv4 address | 212.85.29.61 |
| lunacleaningservice.com | NS | Name server | ns2.dns-parking.com |
| lunacleaningservice.com | NS | Name server | ns1.dns-parking.com |
| lunacleaningservice.com | SOA | Start of Authority | ns1.dns-parking.com. dns.hostinger.com. 2025112701 10000 2400 604800 600 |
| lunacleaningservice.com | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2a02:4780:1:586:0:3058:1fb9:7 |
| lunacleaningservice.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issuewild "letsencrypt.org" |
| lunacleaningservice.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "letsencrypt.org" |
| lunacleaningservice.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "pki.goog" |
| lunacleaningservice.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issuewild "comodoca.com" |
| lunacleaningservice.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issuewild "globalsign.com" |
| lunacleaningservice.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "globalsign.com" |
| lunacleaningservice.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issuewild "digicert.com" |
| lunacleaningservice.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issuewild "sectigo.com" |
| lunacleaningservice.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "digicert.com" |
| lunacleaningservice.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "comodoca.com" |
| lunacleaningservice.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "sectigo.com" |
| lunacleaningservice.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issuewild "pki.goog" |
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.