Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | Reserved Domain |
| Description: | No description found |
| ip_address | 54.232.160.218 |
| country | BR  |
| network_name | Amazon.com, Inc. |
| asn | AS16509 |
22/tcp | ssh | OpenSSH 9.6p1 Ubuntu 3ubuntu13.14 |
80/tcp | http | nginx - |
443/tcp | https | nginx - |
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| HTTP/3 | Miscellaneous |
| jQuery 3.5.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| MinIO | Network storage |
| Nginx | Web servers, Reverse proxies |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| HSTS | Security |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| HTTP/3 | Miscellaneous |
| jQuery 3.5.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| MinIO | Network storage |
| Nginx | Web servers, Reverse proxies |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| HSTS | Security |
Vulnerability description
We noticed that server software and technology details are exposed, potentially aiding attackers in tailoring specific exploits against identified systems and versions.
Risk description
The risk is that an attacker could use this information to mount specific attacks against the identified software type and version.
Recommendation
We recommend you to eliminate the information which permits the identification of software platform, technology, server and operating system: HTTP server headers, HTML meta information, etc.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-200 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://icc.gg/ | Response headers include the HTTP Content-Security-Policy security header with the following security issues: |
Vulnerability description
We noticed that the Content-Security-Policy (CSP) header configured for the web application includes unsafe directives. The CSP header activates a protection mechanism implemented in web browsers which prevents exploitation of Cross-Site Scripting vulnerabilities (XSS) by restricting the sources from which content can be loaded or executed.
Risk description
For example, if the unsafe-inline directive is present in the CSP header, the execution of inline scripts and event handlers is allowed. This can be exploited by an attacker to execute arbitrary JavaScript code in the context of the vulnerable application.
Recommendation
Remove the unsafe values from the directives, adopt nonces or hashes for safer inclusion of inline scripts if they are needed, and explicitly define the sources from which scripts, styles, images or other resources can be loaded.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-1021 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| URL | Method | Parameters | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| https://icc.gg/ | 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: ivan@almeida.com.br ivan@ivancarlos.com.br |
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 |
Infrastructure Vulnerabilities
Evidence
We found insecure EDNS configuration on the following nameservers: ns-471.awsdns-58.com ns-471.awsdns-58.com:
Vulnerability description
We found that the server does not properly implement EDNS (Extension Mechanisms for DNS). EDNS allows larger DNS packets and supports modern features such as DNSSEC.
Risk description
The risk exists because improper or missing EDNS support can lead to truncated responses, degraded DNS performance, and compatibility issues with DNSSEC. This exposes users to risks such as incomplete DNS resolution and failed DNSSEC validation.
Recommendation
We recommend ensuring the proper implementation of EDNS on the DNS server. Update the DNS server software to support EDNS fully, including modern features like DNSSEC. Regularly test DNS configurations to ensure compliance and performance.
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| icc.gg | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 -all" |
| icc.gg | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 include:_spf.google.com -all" |
Vulnerability description
We found that the target has more than one configured DNS SPF (Sender Policy Framework) record. SPF is designed to prevent email spoofing by specifying which mail servers are allowed to send email on behalf of a domain. According to RFC 7208, a domain must have only one SPF record. Multiple SPF records can cause validation issues, leading to failed email authentication checks. This could impact email deliverability, and legitimate emails may be rejected or marked as spam.
Risk description
Having multiple SPF records poses a significant risk to email security and deliverability. When a receiving email server encounters more than one SPF record, it might fail to properly validate the SPF configuration, leading to the rejection of legitimate emails or their classification as spam. This can negatively affect business operations by disrupting email communication with customers, partners, or internal stakeholders. Furthermore, failure to comply with SPF best practices can make the domain more vulnerable to email spoofing attacks, which could damage the organization's reputation and lead to phishing attempts using the domain name.
Recommendation
We recommend removing any redundant or conflicting SPF records and ensuring that only one SPF record is present. The multiple records should be merged into a single SPF entry that includes all necessary authorized mail servers. For example, if two SPF records exist, they can be combined into one as follows:\nv=spf1 include:spf1.example.com include:spf2.example.com -all\nAfterward, verify that the single SPF record covers all the intended mail servers. Test the SPF configuration using email testing tools to confirm that it works correctly and that email deliverability is not negatively impacted.
Evidence
We found insecure DNS cookie usage on the following nameservers: ns-471.awsdns-58.com, ns-725.awsdns-26.net, ns-1276.awsdns-31.org, ns-1919.awsdns-47.co.uk
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
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| MinIO | Network storage |
| Nginx | Web servers, Reverse proxies |
| HSTS | Security |
| HTTP/3 | Miscellaneous |
| jQuery 3.5.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
Vulnerability description
We noticed that server software and technology details are exposed, potentially aiding attackers in tailoring specific exploits against identified systems and versions.
Risk description
The risk is that an attacker could use this information to mount specific attacks against the identified software type and version.
Recommendation
We recommend you to eliminate the information which permits the identification of software platform, technology, server and operating system: HTTP server headers, HTML meta information, etc.
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.icc.gg | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=reject; fo=1; adkim=r; aspf=r; pct=100; rua=mailto:dmarc@icc.gg; ruf=mailto:dmarc@icc.gg; rf=afrf; ri=86400;" |
Evidence
| DKIM selector | Key type | Key size | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| rsa | 1122 | "v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAt5mfKQKP/1WWQcyDpZDnnbHTpB7X6cOOxOEQokTcnLLeqT9VsO+9GkFYVlxGZ0Y0WBH0N0jPfKB40Rmgl6qCgI4m5TOArLhgA3CHW/1Mp/3Q1MI0WSUmc3Z8H0v/+T8/N3jE/aTLjzPoHEW" "uLQPUudksDtfg5MyORYt3Wh6aTt9EQ+E8JlOSMvfNA0YSdubREtT5SJTgopJELt+bNo1yyDi3NDDK2BhSx6dvLmEy9ydjKqG8lJgva+qwR/5Kf+syWg5b5l+OY0gB7xWAEZC45BG0aXqk5JSXgLELhpxOL89+8Rr+r69aBb46IeOpTETo5st907DVWsLQoMAshkqkmwIDAQAB" |
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| icc.gg | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 include:_spf.google.com -all" |
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| icc.gg | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 -all" |
Evidence
| Operating System | Accuracy |
|---|---|
| Linux 2.6.32 | 93% |
Vulnerability description
OS Detection
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| icc.gg | A | IPv4 address | 54.232.160.218 |
| icc.gg | NS | Name server | ns-471.awsdns-58.com |
| icc.gg | NS | Name server | ns-725.awsdns-26.net |
| icc.gg | NS | Name server | ns-1276.awsdns-31.org |
| icc.gg | NS | Name server | ns-1919.awsdns-47.co.uk |
| icc.gg | MX | Mail server | 0 smtp.google.com |
| icc.gg | SOA | Start of Authority | ns-1276.awsdns-31.org. sec.icc.gg. 4 7200 900 1209600 86400 |
| icc.gg | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2600:1f1e:dc1:5f07:8e13:8517:febb:63d0 |
| icc.gg | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=ZvbJayXMYkV-kd2utYH_z-HAER5UyTcUZyij2Q4OBpU" |
| icc.gg | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 -all" |
| icc.gg | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 include:_spf.google.com -all" |
| icc.gg | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 iodef "mailto:sec@icc.gg" |
| icc.gg | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "letsencrypt.org" |
| icc.gg | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "pki.goog; cansignhttpexchanges=yes" |
| icc.gg | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "sectigo.com" |
| icc.gg | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "ssl.com" |
| icc.gg | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issuewild "letsencrypt.org" |
| icc.gg | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issuewild "pki.goog; cansignhttpexchanges=yes" |
| icc.gg | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issuewild "sectigo.com" |
| icc.gg | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issuewild "ssl.com" |
| _dmarc.icc.gg | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=reject; fo=1; adkim=r; aspf=r; pct=100; rua=mailto:dmarc@icc.gg; ruf=mailto:dmarc@icc.gg; rf=afrf; ri=86400;" |
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.