Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | The public’s one account for government. | Login.gov |
| Description: | Use one account and password for secure, private access to participating government agencies. |
| ip_address | 52.85.185.22 |
| country | US  |
| network_name | Amazon.com, Inc. |
| asn | AS16509 |
| ip_address | 52.85.185.28 |
| country | US |
| network_name | Amazon.com, Inc. |
| asn | AS16509 |
| ip_address | 52.85.185.70 |
| country | US |
| network_name | Amazon.com, Inc. |
| asn | AS16509 |
| ip_address | 52.85.185.95 |
| country | US |
| network_name | Amazon.com, Inc. |
| asn | AS16509 |
80/tcp | http | Amazon CloudFront httpd - |
443/tcp | https | - - |
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Amazon Web Services | PaaS |
| Amazon CloudFront | CDN |
| Amazon S3 | CDN |
| Emotion | JavaScript frameworks, Development |
| web-vitals | JavaScript libraries, RUM |
| Google Analytics GA4 | Analytics |
| MySQL | Databases |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| DoubleClick Floodlight | Advertising |
| PWA | Miscellaneous |
| WordPress | CMS, Blogs |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Lodash 4.17.23 | JavaScript libraries |
| HSTS | Security |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-4800 | 8.1 | 0.01026 | 0.59056 | Impact: The fix for CVE-2021-23337 (https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-35jh-r3h4-6jhm) added validation for the variable option in _.template but did not apply the same validation to options.imports key names. Both paths flow into the same Function() constructor sink. When an application passes untrusted input as options.imports key names, an attacker can inject default-parameter expressions that execute arbitrary code at template compilation time. Additionally, _.template uses assignInWith to merge imports, which enumerates inherited properties via for..in. If Object.prototype has been polluted by any other vector, the polluted keys are copied into the imports object and passed to Function(). Patches: Users should upgrade to version 4.18.0. Workarounds: Do not pass untrusted input as key names in options.imports. Only use developer-controlled, static key names. |
Vulnerability description
Outdated or vulnerable software components include versions of server-side software that are no longer supported or have known, publicly disclosed vulnerabilities. Using outdated software significantly increases the attack surface of a system and may allow unauthorized access, data leaks, or service disruptions. Vulnerabilities in these components are often well-documented and actively exploited by attackers. Without security patches or vendor support, any weaknesses remain unmitigated, exposing the application to risks. In some cases, even after patching, the reported version may remain unchanged, requiring manual verification.
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-1035 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Amazon Web Services | PaaS |
| Amazon CloudFront | CDN |
| Amazon S3 | CDN |
| Emotion | JavaScript frameworks, Development |
| web-vitals | JavaScript libraries, RUM |
| Google Analytics GA4 | Analytics |
| MySQL | Databases |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| DoubleClick Floodlight | Advertising |
| PWA | Miscellaneous |
| WordPress | CMS, Blogs |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Lodash 4.17.23 | JavaScript libraries |
| 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://login.gov/ | 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-1021 |
| 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://login.gov/ | 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 | Method | Parameters | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| https://login.gov/join | 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: jointts@gsa.gov |
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
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | CISA KEV | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-4800 | 8.1 | 0.01026 | 0.59056 | No | Impact: The fix for CVE-2021-23337 (https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-35jh-r3h4-6jhm) added validation for the variable option in _.template but did not apply the same validation to options.imports key names. Both paths flow into the same Function() constructor sink. When an application passes untrusted input as options.imports key names, an attacker can inject default-parameter expressions that execute arbitrary code at template compilation time. Additionally, _.template uses assignInWith to merge imports, which enumerates inherited properties via for..in. If Object.prototype has been polluted by any other vector, the polluted keys are copied into the imports object and passed to Function(). Patches: Users should upgrade to version 4.18.0. Workarounds: Do not pass untrusted input as key names in options.imports. Only use developer-controlled, static key names. |
Vulnerability description
Vulnerabilities found for Lodash 4.17.23
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
We found insecure EDNS configuration on the following nameservers: ns-1458.awsdns-54.org ns-1458.awsdns-54.org:
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.login.gov | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=reject; pct=100; fo=1; ri=3600; rua=mailto:dmarc-reports@login.gov,mailto:reports@dmarc.cyber.dhs.gov; ruf=mailto:dmarc-forensics@login.gov" |
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 found insecure DNS cookie usage on the following nameservers: ns-249.awsdns-31.com, ns-521.awsdns-01.net, ns-1458.awsdns-54.org, ns-1641.awsdns-13.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
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| login.gov | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 include:amazonses.com include:_spf.google.com include:mail.zendesk.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
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| WordPress | CMS, Blogs |
| Emotion | JavaScript frameworks, Development |
| MySQL | Databases |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Amazon Web Services | PaaS |
| web-vitals | JavaScript libraries, RUM |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Google Analytics GA4 | Analytics |
| DoubleClick Floodlight | Advertising |
| HSTS | Security |
| Amazon S3 | CDN |
| Amazon CloudFront | CDN |
| PWA | Miscellaneous |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| Lodash 4.17.23 | 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
| DKIM selector | Key type | Key size | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| rsa | 1416 | "v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAkcuOOdgaWfHIKM1ILlzPOHBPJKLxU9+1+ufIprNdjrD+QQ6/uJtc/tP5s1MUwYU/fld2Y1QwXC5JHdE6JXP31XwCtvbfIwn/Dr/EaRB3PomOp0SNbTtFMmvuxPF87HidvzDH3cWXcmyjMx6XU1i9O3nBs66Z+8i4gfh/PZdjJs6wcNp9urJjCo23KYzbiNAn" "7FJjbD4g3NucMvkBXHIsOMLvb7WzIekpxL2bjz6XlDfK1t4VTLv4IqIlLMfhYGwwaWPhgyra7qezYkp6a2XSoLWxPWRbfb1bNmVUJ7vBeB6NdFnr9n/7TqbhDVEo9/XyO1MIsuNTTZuhurlZqoXx0QIDAQAB" | |
| smtpapi | rsa | 1188 | "L1XfURLRizB_sP022sBOoQGaulRl34R9B3xEZxTTFk=rsa; t=s; p=MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDPtW5iwpXVPiH5FzJ7Nrl8USzuY9zqqzjE0D1r04xDN6qwziDnmgcFNNfMewVKN2D1O+2J9N14hRprzByFwfQW76yojh54Xu3uSbQ3JP0A7k8o8GutRF8zbFUA8n0ZH2y0cIEjMliXY4W4LwPA7m4q0ObmvSjhd6" "3O9d8z1XkUBwIDAQAB" |
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| login.gov | A | IPv4 address | 52.85.185.22 |
| login.gov | A | IPv4 address | 52.85.185.28 |
| login.gov | A | IPv4 address | 52.85.185.70 |
| login.gov | A | IPv4 address | 52.85.185.95 |
| login.gov | NS | Name server | ns-249.awsdns-31.com |
| login.gov | NS | Name server | ns-521.awsdns-01.net |
| login.gov | NS | Name server | ns-1458.awsdns-54.org |
| login.gov | NS | Name server | ns-1641.awsdns-13.co.uk |
| login.gov | MX | Mail server | 10 aspmx.l.google.com |
| login.gov | MX | Mail server | 20 alt1.aspmx.l.google.com |
| login.gov | MX | Mail server | 20 alt2.aspmx.l.google.com |
| login.gov | MX | Mail server | 30 aspmx2.googlemail.com |
| login.gov | MX | Mail server | 30 aspmx3.googlemail.com |
| login.gov | MX | Mail server | 30 aspmx4.googlemail.com |
| login.gov | MX | Mail server | 30 aspmx5.googlemail.com |
| login.gov | SOA | Start of Authority | ns-1458.awsdns-54.org. awsdns-hostmaster.amazon.com. 1 7200 900 1209600 60 |
| login.gov | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2600:9000:2208:4e00:f:65e5:6140:93a1 |
| login.gov | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2600:9000:2208:6800:f:65e5:6140:93a1 |
| login.gov | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2600:9000:2208:8e00:f:65e5:6140:93a1 |
| login.gov | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2600:9000:2208:9c00:f:65e5:6140:93a1 |
| login.gov | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2600:9000:2208:9e00:f:65e5:6140:93a1 |
| login.gov | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2600:9000:2208:a600:f:65e5:6140:93a1 |
| login.gov | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2600:9000:2208:be00:f:65e5:6140:93a1 |
| login.gov | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2600:9000:2208:f200:f:65e5:6140:93a1 |
| login.gov | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=-7aP7JZmhnRAaErZX3lSG8X-eFt0e5YymTt-9Kvk_G4" |
| login.gov | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 include:amazonses.com include:_spf.google.com include:mail.zendesk.com ~all" |
| login.gov | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 iodef "mailto:security@login.gov" |
| login.gov | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "amazon.com" |
| login.gov | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "letsencrypt.org" |
| _dmarc.login.gov | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=reject; pct=100; fo=1; ri=3600; rua=mailto:dmarc-reports@login.gov,mailto:reports@dmarc.cyber.dhs.gov; ruf=mailto:dmarc-forensics@login.gov" |
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 |
|---|---|
| Crestron XPanel control system | 87% |
Vulnerability description
OS Detection