Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | Hertig Fleurs | Créations de bouquets de fleurs à Fribourg |
| Description: | Hertig Fleurs - Créations de bouquets uniques pour vos événements spéciaux depuis 1851. Commandez en ligne et recevez vos fleurs le jour même à Fribourg. |
| ip_address | 185.177.62.85 |
| country | CH  |
| network_name | Infomaniak Network SA |
| asn | AS29222 |
21/tcp | ftp | ProFTPD - |
22/tcp | ssh | OpenSSH 8.4p1 Debian 5+deb11u5 |
80/tcp | http | Apache - |
443/tcp | https | Apache - |
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Microsoft Advertising | Advertising |
| Backbone.js | JavaScript frameworks |
| cdnjs | CDN |
| Clipboard.js | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery CDN | CDN |
| Contact Form 7 6.1.3 | WordPress plugins, Form builders |
| Elfsight | Widgets |
| Font Awesome 6.5.1 | Font scripts |
| Bootstrap | UI frameworks |
| jQuery Migrate 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Moxie 1.3.5.1 | Widgets, Accessibility |
| core-js 3.36.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Analytics | Analytics |
| Apache HTTP Server | Web servers |
| jQuery 3.6.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery UI 1.13.2 | JavaScript libraries |
| AOS | JavaScript libraries |
| MySQL | Databases |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Popper | Miscellaneous |
| Twitter Emoji (Twemoji) | Font scripts |
| Underscore.js 1.13.7 | JavaScript libraries |
| WordPress | CMS, Blogs |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| CookieYes | Cookie compliance |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Plupload 2.1.9 | Widgets, Accessibility |
| HSTS | Security |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://hertigfleurs.ch/ | 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 |
|---|---|
| Microsoft Advertising | Advertising |
| Backbone.js | JavaScript frameworks |
| cdnjs | CDN |
| Clipboard.js | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery CDN | CDN |
| Contact Form 7 6.1.3 | WordPress plugins, Form builders |
| Elfsight | Widgets |
| Font Awesome 6.5.1 | Font scripts |
| Bootstrap | UI frameworks |
| jQuery Migrate 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Moxie 1.3.5.1 | Widgets, Accessibility |
| core-js 3.36.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Analytics | Analytics |
| Apache HTTP Server | Web servers |
| jQuery 3.6.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery UI 1.13.2 | JavaScript libraries |
| AOS | JavaScript libraries |
| MySQL | Databases |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Popper | Miscellaneous |
| Twitter Emoji (Twemoji) | Font scripts |
| Underscore.js 1.13.7 | JavaScript libraries |
| WordPress | CMS, Blogs |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| CookieYes | Cookie compliance |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Plupload 2.1.9 | Widgets, Accessibility |
| 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.
Evidence
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://hertigfleurs.ch/ | 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
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://hertigfleurs.ch/ | 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 | Method | Parameters | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| https://hertigfleurs.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/08 | 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 | 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
Vulnerability description
Website is accessible.
Evidence
| URL | Method | Parameters | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| https://hertigfleurs.ch/ | 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: marly@hertigfleurs.ch gare@hertigfleurs.ch info@hertigfleurs.ch |
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 managed to detect a publicly accessible SSH service. Starting Nmap ( https://nmap.org ) at 2025-11-03 19:31 EET Nmap scan report for hertigfleurs.ch (185.177.62.85) Host is up (0.020s latency). Other addresses for hertigfleurs.ch (not scanned): 2001:1600:13:100:f816:3eff:fe01:8979 rDNS record for 185.177.62.85: od-42b25d.infomaniak.ch
PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION 22/tcp open ssh OpenSSH 8.4p1 Debian 5+deb11u5 (protocol 2.0) | ssh-auth-methods: | Supported authentication methods: | publickey |_ password Service Info: OS: Linux; CPE: cpe:/o:linux:linux_kernel
Service detection performed. Please report any incorrect results at https://nmap.org/submit/ . Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 0.73 seconds
Vulnerability description
We found that the SSH service with username/password authentication is publicly accessible. Network administrators often use remote administration protocols to control devices like switches, routers, and other essential systems. However, allowing these services to be accessible via the Internet can increase security risks, creating potential opportunities for attacks on the organization.
Risk description
Exposing this service online with username/password authentication can enable attackers to launch authentication attacks, like guessing login credentials, and potentially gaining unauthorized access. Vulnerabilities, such as unpatched software, protocol flaws, or backdoors could also be exploited. An example is the CVE-2024-3094 (XZ Utils Backdoor) vulnerability.
Recommendation
We recommend turning off SSH with username/password authentication access over the Internet and instead using a Virtual Private Network (VPN) that mandates two-factor authentication (2FA). If the SSH service is essential for business purposes, we recommend limiting access only from designated IP addresses using a firewall. Furthermore, it is advisable to utilize SSH Public Key Authentication since it employs a key pair to verify the identity of a user or process.
Evidence
We managed to detect a publicly accessible File Transfer Protocol (FTP) service. PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION 21/tcp open ftp ProFTPD
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
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.hertigfleurs.ch | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=none; ruf=mailto:info@hertigfleurs.ch" |
Vulnerability description
We found that the DMARC record for the domain is not configured with rua tag. When a DMARC record is not configured with the rua (Reporting URI for Aggregate Reports) tag, the domain owner misses out on critical feedback regarding the domain's email authentication performance. Aggregate reports are essential for monitoring how a domain's DMARC policy is applied across various mail servers and whether legitimate or malicious emails are being sent on behalf of the domain. Without this reporting, domain administrators have no visibility into how their DMARC policy is being enforced, which hinders their ability to detect potential spoofing or authentication issues.
Risk description
The absence of rua reporting creates a significant blind spot in the domain's email security posture. Without aggregate reports, domain administrators cannot track DMARC compliance across email sent from their domain, leaving them unaware of potential misconfigurations or unauthorized use of their domain for malicious purposes, such as phishing or spoofing. This lack of visibility increases the risk of undetected spoofing attempts, which could damage the domain's reputation and lead to financial, operational, or reputational harm. Moreover, legitimate email issues, such as misaligned SPF or DKIM configurations, may also go unnoticed, affecting email deliverability.
Recommendation
We recommend configuring the rua tag in the DMARC record to receive aggregate reports from mail servers. This tag should point to a reliable email address or monitoring service capable of handling DMARC aggregate reports, such as rua=mailto:dmarc-reports@example.com. These reports provide valuable insights into how email from the domain is being treated by receiving mail servers, highlighting potential authentication issues and attempts to spoof the domain. Regularly reviewing these reports will help ensure the DMARC policy is properly enforced and that any email authentication failures are addressed in a timely manner.
Evidence
We found insecure DNS cookie usage on the following nameservers: ns11.infomaniak.ch, ns12.infomaniak.ch
Vulnerability description
We found that the server does not implement DNS Cookies or uses them insecurely. DNS Cookies help prevent DNS-based attacks, such as spoofing and amplification attacks.
Risk description
The risk exists because without DNS Cookies, the server is vulnerable to DNS spoofing and amplification attacks. Attackers can manipulate responses or use the server in distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, compromising network availability and security.
Recommendation
We recommend enabling DNS Cookies to prevent spoofed DNS responses. Ensure proper cookie validation is implemented to mitigate DNS amplification attacks. Regularly update DNS servers to support the latest DNS security features.
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.hertigfleurs.ch | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=none; ruf=mailto:info@hertigfleurs.ch" |
Vulnerability description
We found that the DMARC record for the domain is not configured with sp policy, meaning that no policy is enforced for subdomains. When a DMARC record does not include a subdomain policy (sp directive), subdomains are not explicitly covered by the main domain's DMARC policy. This means that emails sent from subdomains (e.g., sub.example.com) may not be subject to the same DMARC enforcement as the main domain (example.com). As a result, attackers could potentially spoof emails from subdomains without being blocked or flagged, even if the main domain has a strict DMARC policy.
Risk description
Without a subdomain policy (sp directive) in the DMARC record, subdomains are not protected by the same DMARC enforcement as the main domain, leaving them vulnerable to spoofing attacks. This inconsistency can be exploited by attackers to send phishing emails from subdomains, undermining the organization’s overall email security.
Recommendation
To mitigate the risk, we recommend configuring the DMARC record with a subdomain policy by adding the sp=reject or sp=quarantine directive. This will extend DMARC enforcement to all subdomains, preventing spoofing attempts and maintaining consistent security across both the main domain and its subdomains.
Evidence
We checked 2056 selectors but found no DKIM records.
Vulnerability description
We found that no DKIM record was configured. When a DKIM (DomainKeys Identified Mail) record is not present for a domain, it means that outgoing emails from that domain are not cryptographically signed. DKIM is a critical component of email authentication, allowing recipients to verify that an email was genuinely sent from an authorized server and that the message has not been altered in transit. The absence of a DKIM record leaves the domain vulnerable to email spoofing and phishing attacks, as attackers can send fraudulent emails that appear to originate from the domain without any cryptographic verification.
Risk description
Without a DKIM record, recipients have no way of verifying the integrity or authenticity of emails sent from the domain. This increases the likelihood of phishing and spoofing attacks, where malicious actors impersonate the domain to send fraudulent emails. This can lead to significant security incidents, such as credential theft, financial fraud, or the distribution of malware. Additionally, many email providers use DKIM as part of their spam and reputation filters, meaning that emails from a domain without DKIM may be flagged as spam or rejected, impacting the deliverability and reputation of legitimate emails.
Recommendation
We recommend implementing DKIM for your domain to enhance email security and protect your brand from email-based attacks. Generate a DKIM key pair (public and private keys), publish the public key in the DNS under the appropriate selector, and configure your email servers to sign outgoing messages using the private key. Ensure that the DKIM key length is at least 1024 bits to prevent cryptographic attacks. Regularly monitor DKIM signatures to ensure the system is functioning correctly and update keys periodically to maintain security.
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.hertigfleurs.ch | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=none; ruf=mailto:info@hertigfleurs.ch" |
Vulnerability description
We found that the target uses p=none in the DMARC policy. The DMARC policy set to p=none means that the domain owner is not taking any action on emails that fail DMARC validation. This configuration effectively disables enforcement, allowing potentially spoofed or fraudulent emails to be delivered without any additional scrutiny.
Risk description
Emails that fail DMARC checks are still delivered to recipients. This leaves the domain highly vulnerable to email spoofing and phishing attacks, as malicious actors can impersonate the domain without facing any consequences from DMARC enforcement.
Recommendation
We recommend changing the DMARC policy to p=quarantine or, ideally, p=reject to actively block or quarantine emails that fail DMARC validation. This will enhance the security of your domain against spoofing and phishing attacks by ensuring that only legitimate emails are delivered.
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| hertigfleurs.ch | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 include:spf.infomaniak.ch include:spf.senselan.ch -all" |
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| hertigfleurs.ch | A | IPv4 address | 185.177.62.85 |
| hertigfleurs.ch | NS | Name server | ns11.infomaniak.ch |
| hertigfleurs.ch | NS | Name server | ns12.infomaniak.ch |
| hertigfleurs.ch | MX | Mail server | 10 mx01.senselan.ch |
| hertigfleurs.ch | MX | Mail server | 10 mx02.senselan.ch |
| hertigfleurs.ch | MX | Mail server | 10 mx03.senselan.ch |
| hertigfleurs.ch | SOA | Start of Authority | ns11.infomaniak.ch. hostmaster.infomaniak.ch. 2024112975 10800 3600 605800 3600 |
| hertigfleurs.ch | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2001:1600:13:100:f816:3eff:fe01:8979 |
| hertigfleurs.ch | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 include:spf.infomaniak.ch include:spf.senselan.ch -all" |
| _dmarc.hertigfleurs.ch | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=none; ruf=mailto:info@hertigfleurs.ch" |
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
| Operating System | Accuracy |
|---|---|
| Linux 5.0 - 5.4 | 100% |
Vulnerability description
OS Detection
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| WordPress | CMS, Blogs |
| MySQL | Databases |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Contact Form 7 | WordPress plugins, Form builders |
| Bootstrap | UI frameworks |
| Apache HTTP Server | Web servers |
| Backbone.js | JavaScript frameworks |
| Google Analytics | Analytics |
| HSTS | Security |
| Underscore.js 1.13.7 | JavaScript libraries |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| Plupload 2.1.9 | Widgets, Accessibility |
| Moxie 1.3.5.1 | Widgets, Accessibility |
| jQuery UI 1.13.2 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery Migrate 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery CDN | CDN |
| jQuery 3.6.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Elfsight | Widgets |
| CookieYes | Cookie compliance |
| Clipboard.js | JavaScript libraries |
| Popper | 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.