Vulnerability Scan Result

Target:

https://awtrack.com/

Scanned target: https://awtrack.com/

Submitted: Jul 17, 2025 from MX

Public Scan

Scan mode: Passive (non-intrusive)

Summary

high

Info

Low

Medium

High

Critical

Screenshot

Title:	All-Ways Track™ - Trucking Software - Freight Brokering Software - GPS Navigation
Description:	Dispatch Software for the trucking industry. Loads, IFTA, Invoicing, Settlements, Trailer Control, Truck Planning.

IP Information

ip_address	44.217.170.241
country	US
network_name	Amazon Inc
asn	AS14618

ip_address	18.204.163.27
country	US
network_name	Amazon Inc
asn	AS14618

Open Ports

80/tcp	http	awselb/2.0 -
443/tcp	https	nginx 1.18.0

Web Technologies

Software / Version	Category
Amazon Web Services	PaaS
AWS Certificate Manager	SSL/TLS certificate authorities
Amazon ALB	Load balancers
Google Analytics GA4	Analytics
jQuery 1.7.2	JavaScript libraries
Modernizr \1	JavaScript libraries
Nginx 1.18.0	Web servers, Reverse proxies
prettyPhoto	JavaScript libraries
Google Tag Manager	Tag managers
Ubuntu	Operating systems

Web Application Vulnerabilities

Evidence

CVSS	CVE	Summary	Affected software
7.5	CVE-2023-44487	The HTTP/2 protocol allows a denial of service (server resource consumption) because request cancellation can reset many streams quickly, as exploited in the wild in August through October 2023.	nginx 1.18.0
7.1	CVE-2022-41742	NGINX Open Source before versions 1.23.2 and 1.22.1, NGINX Open Source Subscription before versions R2 P1 and R1 P1, and NGINX Plus before versions R27 P1 and R26 P1 have a vulnerability in the module ngx_http_mp4_module that might allow a local attacker to cause a worker process crash, or might result in worker process memory disclosure by using a specially crafted audio or video file. The issue affects only NGINX products that are built with the module ngx_http_mp4_module, when the mp4 directive is used in the configuration file. Further, the attack is possible only if an attacker can trigger processing of a specially crafted audio or video file with the module ngx_http_mp4_module.	nginx 1.18.0
7	CVE-2022-41741	NGINX Open Source before versions 1.23.2 and 1.22.1, NGINX Open Source Subscription before versions R2 P1 and R1 P1, and NGINX Plus before versions R27 P1 and R26 P1 have a vulnerability in the module ngx_http_mp4_module that might allow a local attacker to corrupt NGINX worker memory, resulting in its termination or potential other impact using a specially crafted audio or video file. The issue affects only NGINX products that are built with the ngx_http_mp4_module, when the mp4 directive is used in the configuration file. Further, the attack is possible only if an attacker can trigger processing of a specially crafted audio or video file with the module ngx_http_mp4_module.	nginx 1.18.0
6.8	CVE-2021-23017	A security issue in nginx resolver was identified, which might allow an attacker who is able to forge UDP packets from the DNS server to cause 1-byte memory overwrite, resulting in worker process crash or potential other impact.	nginx 1.18.0
5.8	CVE-2021-3618	ALPACA is an application layer protocol content confusion attack, exploiting TLS servers implementing different protocols but using compatible certificates, such as multi-domain or wildcard certificates. A MiTM attacker having access to victim's traffic at the TCP/IP layer can redirect traffic from one subdomain to another, resulting in a valid TLS session. This breaks the authentication of TLS and cross-protocol attacks may be possible where the behavior of one protocol service may compromise the other at the application layer.	nginx 1.18.0
4.3	CVE-2020-11023	In jQuery versions greater than or equal to 1.0.3 and before 3.5.0, passing HTML containing <option> elements from untrusted sources - even after sanitizing it - to one of jQuery's DOM manipulation methods (i.e. .html(), .append(), and others) may execute untrusted code. This problem is patched in jQuery 3.5.0.	jquery 1.7.2
4.3	CVE-2020-11022	In jQuery versions greater than or equal to 1.2 and before 3.5.0, passing HTML from untrusted sources - even after sanitizing it - to one of jQuery's DOM manipulation methods (i.e. .html(), .append(), and others) may execute untrusted code. This problem is patched in jQuery 3.5.0.	jquery 1.7.2
4.3	CVE-2019-11358	jQuery before 3.4.0, as used in Drupal, Backdrop CMS, and other products, mishandles jQuery.extend(true, {}, ...) because of Object.prototype pollution. If an unsanitized source object contained an enumerable __proto__ property, it could extend the native Object.prototype.	jquery 1.7.2
4.3	CVE-2015-9251	jQuery before 3.0.0 is vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) attacks when a cross-domain Ajax request is performed without the dataType option, causing text/javascript responses to be executed.	jquery 1.7.2
4.3	CVE-2012-6708	jQuery before 1.9.0 is vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) attacks. The jQuery(strInput) function does not differentiate selectors from HTML in a reliable fashion. In vulnerable versions, jQuery determined whether the input was HTML by looking for the '<' character anywhere in the string, giving attackers more flexibility when attempting to construct a malicious payload. In fixed versions, jQuery only deems the input to be HTML if it explicitly starts with the '<' character, limiting exploitability only to attackers who can control the beginning of a string, which is far less common.	jquery 1.7.2

Vulnerability description

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

Risk description

The risk is that an attacker could search for an appropriate exploit (or create one himself) for any of these vulnerabilities and use it to attack the system. Since the vulnerabilities were discovered using only version-based testing, the risk level for this finding will not exceed 'high' severity. Critical risks will be assigned to vulnerabilities identified through accurate active testing methods.

Recommendation

In order to eliminate the risk of these vulnerabilities, we recommend you check the installed software version and upgrade to the latest version.

Classification

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

Evidence

URL	Cookie Name	Evidence
https://awtrack.com/webapp/	PHPSESSID	Set-Cookie: PHPSESSID=q6udrg2njaob3ptjdfclpc6c8v

Vulnerability description

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

Risk description

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

Recommendation

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

Classification

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

Evidence

URL	Evidence
https://awtrack.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

URL	Evidence
https://awtrack.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://awtrack.com/	Response headers do not include the Referrer-Policy HTTP security header as well as the `<meta/>` tag with name 'referrer' is not present in the response.

Vulnerability description

We noticed that the target application's server responses lack the Referrer-Policy HTTP header, which controls how much referrer information the browser will send with each request originated from the current web application.

Risk description

The risk is that if a user visits a web page (e.g. "http://example.com/pricing/") and clicks on a link from that page going to e.g. "https://www.google.com", the browser will send to Google the full originating URL in the `Referer` header, assuming the Referrer-Policy header is not set. The originating URL could be considered sensitive information and it could be used for user tracking.

Recommendation

The Referrer-Policy header should be configured on the server side to avoid user tracking and inadvertent information leakage. The value `no-referrer` of this header instructs the browser to omit the Referer header entirely.

Classification

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

Evidence

Software / Version	Category
Amazon Web Services	PaaS
AWS Certificate Manager	SSL/TLS certificate authorities
Amazon ALB	Load balancers
Google Analytics GA4	Analytics
jQuery 1.7.2	JavaScript libraries
Modernizr \1	JavaScript libraries
Nginx 1.18.0	Web servers, Reverse proxies
prettyPhoto	JavaScript libraries
Google Tag Manager	Tag managers
Ubuntu	Operating systems

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://awtrack.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
Missing: https://awtrack.com/.well-known/security.txt

Vulnerability description

We have noticed that the server is missing the security.txt file, which is considered a good practice for web security. It provides a standardized way for security researchers and the public to report security vulnerabilities or concerns by outlining the preferred method of contact and reporting procedures.

Risk description

There is no particular risk in not having a security.txt file for your server. However, this file is important because it offers a designated channel for reporting vulnerabilities and security issues.

Recommendation

We recommend you to implement the security.txt file according to the standard, in order to allow researchers or users report any security issues they find, improving the defensive mechanisms of your server.

Evidence

URL Evidence

URL	Evidence
https://awtrack.com/webapp/login.php	`<input class="input-field" id="txtUserNameLogin" maxlength="15" name="txtUserNameLogin" placeholder="Username" size="30" tabindex="1" type="text" value=""/> <input class="input-field" id="txtPassLogin" maxlength="12" name="txtPassLogin" onkeypress="return fnLoginEnter(this,event);" placeholder="Password" size="30" tabindex="1" type="password"/> <button class="button" name="loginButton" onclick="fnLoginI(1);" tabindex="1" type="button" value="Login">Login</button>`

https://awtrack.com/webapp/login.php

<input class="input-field" id="txtUserNameLogin" maxlength="15" name="txtUserNameLogin" placeholder="Username" size="30" tabindex="1" type="text" value=""/> <input class="input-field" id="txtPassLogin" maxlength="12" name="txtPassLogin" onkeypress="return fnLoginEnter(this,event);" placeholder="Password" size="30" tabindex="1" type="password"/> <button class="button" name="loginButton" onclick="fnLoginI(1);" tabindex="1" type="button" value="Login">Login</button>

Vulnerability description

We have discovered that the target application presents a login interface that could be a potential target for attacks. While login interfaces are standard for user authentication, they can become vulnerabilities if not properly secured.

Risk description

The risk is that an attacker could use this interface to mount brute force attacks against known passwords and usernames combinations leaked throughout the web.

Recommendation

Ensure each interface is not bypassable using common knowledge of the application or leaked credentials using occasional password audits.

Infrastructure Vulnerabilities

Evidence

CVE	CVSS	EPSS Score	EPSS Percentile	CISA KEV	Summary
CVE-2023-44487	7.5	0.94437	0.99983	Yes	The HTTP/2 protocol allows a denial of service (server resource consumption) because request cancellation can reset many streams quickly, as exploited in the wild in August through October 2023.
CVE-2022-41742	7.1	0.00073	0.22811	No	NGINX Open Source before versions 1.23.2 and 1.22.1, NGINX Open Source Subscription before versions R2 P1 and R1 P1, and NGINX Plus before versions R27 P1 and R26 P1 have a vulnerability in the module ngx_http_mp4_module that might allow a local attacker to cause a worker process crash, or might result in worker process memory disclosure by using a specially crafted audio or video file. The issue affects only NGINX products that are built with the module ngx_http_mp4_module, when the mp4 directive is used in the configuration file. Further, the attack is possible only if an attacker can trigger processing of a specially crafted audio or video file with the module ngx_http_mp4_module.
CVE-2022-41741	7	0.00857	0.7406	No	NGINX Open Source before versions 1.23.2 and 1.22.1, NGINX Open Source Subscription before versions R2 P1 and R1 P1, and NGINX Plus before versions R27 P1 and R26 P1 have a vulnerability in the module ngx_http_mp4_module that might allow a local attacker to corrupt NGINX worker memory, resulting in its termination or potential other impact using a specially crafted audio or video file. The issue affects only NGINX products that are built with the ngx_http_mp4_module, when the mp4 directive is used in the configuration file. Further, the attack is possible only if an attacker can trigger processing of a specially crafted audio or video file with the module ngx_http_mp4_module.
CVE-2021-23017	6.8	0.76124	0.98858	No	A security issue in nginx resolver was identified, which might allow an attacker who is able to forge UDP packets from the DNS server to cause 1-byte memory overwrite, resulting in worker process crash or potential other impact.
CVE-2021-3618	5.8	0.0045	0.62721	No	ALPACA is an application layer protocol content confusion attack, exploiting TLS servers implementing different protocols but using compatible certificates, such as multi-domain or wildcard certificates. A MiTM attacker having access to victim's traffic at the TCP/IP layer can redirect traffic from one subdomain to another, resulting in a valid TLS session. This breaks the authentication of TLS and cross-protocol attacks may be possible where the behavior of one protocol service may compromise the other at the application layer.

Vulnerability description

Vulnerabilities found for Nginx 1.18.0

Risk description

These vulnerabilities expose the affected applications to the risk of unauthorized access to confidential data and possibly to denial of service attacks. An attacker could search for an appropriate exploit (or create one) for any of these vulnerabilities and use it to attack the system. Notes: - The vulnerabilities are identified based on the server's version.; - Only the first 5 vulnerabilities with the highest risk are shown for each port.; Since the vulnerabilities were discovered using only version-based testing, the risk level for this finding will not exceed "high" severity. Critical risks will be assigned to vulnerabilities identified through accurate active testing methods.

Recommendation

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

Evidence

CVE	CVSS	EPSS Score	EPSS Percentile	CISA KEV	Summary
CVE-2020-11023	4.3	0.21757	0.95461	Yes	In jQuery versions greater than or equal to 1.0.3 and before 3.5.0, passing HTML containing <option> elements from untrusted sources - even after sanitizing it - to one of jQuery's DOM manipulation methods (i.e. .html(), .append(), and others) may execute untrusted code. This problem is patched in jQuery 3.5.0.
CVE-2020-11022	4.3	0.23711	0.95733	No	In jQuery versions greater than or equal to 1.2 and before 3.5.0, passing HTML from untrusted sources - even after sanitizing it - to one of jQuery's DOM manipulation methods (i.e. .html(), .append(), and others) may execute untrusted code. This problem is patched in jQuery 3.5.0.
CVE-2019-11358	4.3	0.02777	0.85438	No	jQuery before 3.4.0, as used in Drupal, Backdrop CMS, and other products, mishandles jQuery.extend(true, {}, ...) because of Object.prototype pollution. If an unsanitized source object contained an enumerable __proto__ property, it could extend the native Object.prototype.
CVE-2015-9251	4.3	0.11238	0.93192	No	jQuery before 3.0.0 is vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) attacks when a cross-domain Ajax request is performed without the dataType option, causing text/javascript responses to be executed.
CVE-2012-6708	4.3	0.01391	0.79517	No	jQuery before 1.9.0 is vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) attacks. The jQuery(strInput) function does not differentiate selectors from HTML in a reliable fashion. In vulnerable versions, jQuery determined whether the input was HTML by looking for the '<' character anywhere in the string, giving attackers more flexibility when attempting to construct a malicious payload. In fixed versions, jQuery only deems the input to be HTML if it explicitly starts with the '<' character, limiting exploitability only to attackers who can control the beginning of a string, which is far less common.

Vulnerability description

Vulnerabilities found for jQuery 1.7.2

Risk description

Recommendation

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

Evidence

DKIM selector	Key type	Key size	Value
default	rsa	1320	"v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAwpx2fsQraiEFRIP2rPS5gGLDE/U8FHxOTjVlmQokAALZS4LNaTZUyxZ9UQaNh6wu8aEdf5Bkr1YnWBwk7kRDAZTw0zGVAVCzlpKawDJ+ik08Il8FM0sRJmG04On+ZRDjjOeWOs3N418qlycsj3ixglx6nwdxkKsjKumgmGqneppVXpqi" "53SBpDVFG16t7qPexantzVWpGaPBBcIJYsA15J0aOqFCEypj88OVnV1eU6mXzIr9o6f2esTDJz3PLEVLvMImBG+u4LAFnLDFk9lnq1SElfLaZQ6ytsYMNHtulJ0CiRtPUGGSuBiDmEawix19nqkByFrTxtXKrbF27JaZ1QIDAQAB"

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 managed to detect that Nginx has reached the End-of-Life (EOL).

Version detected: 1.18.0 End-of-life date: 2021-04-20 Latest version for the cycle: 1.18.0 This release cycle (1.18) doesn't have long-term-support (LTS). The cycle was released on 2020-04-21 and its latest release date was 2020-04-21.

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 jQuery has reached the End-of-Life (EOL).

Version detected: 1.7.2 Latest version for the cycle: 1.12.4 This release cycle (1) doesn't have long-term-support (LTS). The cycle was released on 2006-08-31 and its latest release date was 2016-05-20.

Risk description

Recommendation

Evidence

We didn't find any TXT records associated with the target.

Vulnerability description

We found that the target server has no DMARC policy configured. A missing DMARC (Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance) policy means that the domain is not enforcing any DMARC policies to protect against email spoofing and phishing attacks. Without DMARC, even if SPF (Sender Policy Framework) or DKIM (DomainKeys Identified Mail) are configured, there is no mechanism to tell receiving email servers how to handle messages that fail authentication. This leaves the domain vulnerable to abuse, such as email spoofing and impersonation.

Risk description

Without a DMARC policy, your domain is highly vulnerable to email spoofing, allowing attackers to impersonate your brand and send fraudulent emails that appear legitimate. This can lead to phishing attacks targeting your customers, employees, or partners, potentially resulting in stolen credentials, financial loss, or unauthorized access to sensitive systems. Additionally, repeated spoofing attempts can severely damage your brand's reputation, as recipients may lose trust in communications from your domain, associating your brand with malicious activity. The absence of DMARC also prevents you from monitoring and mitigating email-based attacks, leaving your domain exposed to ongoing abuse.

Recommendation

We recommend implementing a DMARC policy for your domain. Start by configuring a DMARC record with a policy of p=none, which will allow you to monitor email flows without impacting legitimate emails. This initial setup helps identify how emails from your domain are being processed by recipient servers. Once you’ve verified that legitimate emails are passing SPF and DKIM checks, you can gradually enforce stricter policies like p=quarantine or p=reject to protect against spoofing and phishing attacks. Additionally, include rua and ruf email addresses in the DMARC record to receive aggregate and forensic reports. These reports will provide valuable insights into authentication failures and help you detect any spoofing attempts.

Domain Queried	DNS Record Type	Description	Value
awtrack.com	SPF	Sender Policy Framework	"v=spf1 a mx ptr include:justhost.com ?all"

Evidence

Software / Version	Category
Ubuntu	Operating systems
Amazon ALB	Load balancers
Nginx 1.18.0	Web servers, Reverse proxies
Amazon Web Services	PaaS
prettyPhoto	JavaScript libraries
jQuery 1.7.2	JavaScript libraries
Google Tag Manager	Tag managers
Google Analytics GA4	Analytics
AWS Certificate Manager	SSL/TLS certificate authorities

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
awtrack.com	A	IPv4 address	44.217.170.241
awtrack.com	A	IPv4 address	18.204.163.27
awtrack.com	NS	Name server	ns-1003.awsdns-61.net
awtrack.com	NS	Name server	ns-1449.awsdns-53.org
awtrack.com	NS	Name server	ns-1626.awsdns-11.co.uk
awtrack.com	NS	Name server	ns-237.awsdns-29.com
awtrack.com	MX	Mail server	0 mail.awtrack.com
awtrack.com	SOA	Start of Authority	ns-1626.awsdns-11.co.uk. awsdns-hostmaster.amazon.com. 1 7200 900 1209600 86400
awtrack.com	SPF	Sender Policy Framework	"v=spf1 a mx ptr include:justhost.com ?all"

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

DKIM selector	Key type	Key size	Value
default	rsa	1320	"v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAwpx2fsQraiEFRIP2rPS5gGLDE/U8FHxOTjVlmQokAALZS4LNaTZUyxZ9UQaNh6wu8aEdf5Bkr1YnWBwk7kRDAZTw0zGVAVCzlpKawDJ+ik08Il8FM0sRJmG04On+ZRDjjOeWOs3N418qlycsj3ixglx6nwdxkKsjKumgmGqneppVXpqi" "53SBpDVFG16t7qPexantzVWpGaPBBcIJYsA15J0aOqFCEypj88OVnV1eU6mXzIr9o6f2esTDJz3PLEVLvMImBG+u4LAFnLDFk9lnq1SElfLaZQ6ytsYMNHtulJ0CiRtPUGGSuBiDmEawix19nqkByFrTxtXKrbF27JaZ1QIDAQAB"