Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | Robinhood: Commission-free Stock Trading & Investing App |
| Description: | Robinhood UK has commission-free stock trading, and tools to help shape your financial future. Limitations, risks and other costs apply, including contract fees when trading options. |
| ip_address | 13.226.244.129 |
| country | US  |
| network_name | Amazon.com, Inc. |
| asn | AS16509 |
| ip_address | 13.226.244.66 |
| country | US |
| network_name | Amazon.com, Inc. |
| asn | AS16509 |
| ip_address | 13.226.244.41 |
| country | US |
| network_name | Amazon.com, Inc. |
| asn | AS16509 |
| ip_address | 13.226.244.36 |
| 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 |
| AWS Certificate Manager | SSL/TLS certificate authorities |
| Amazon CloudFront | CDN |
| Linkedin Ads | Advertising |
| Linkedin Insight Tag | Analytics |
| Emotion | JavaScript frameworks, Development |
| core-js 2.6.9 | JavaScript libraries |
| Next.js 10.2.3 | JavaScript frameworks, Web frameworks, Web servers, Static site generator |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| React | JavaScript frameworks |
| Sentry | Issue trackers |
| Three.js 149 | JavaScript graphics |
| Webpack | Miscellaneous |
| Contentful | CMS |
| Envoy | Reverse proxies |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| Lodash 4.17.21 | JavaScript libraries |
| HSTS | Security |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2024-51479 | 7.5 | 0.66731 | 0.98548 | Next.js is a React framework for building full-stack web applications. In affected versions if a Next.js application is performing authorization in middleware based on pathname, it was possible for this authorization to be bypassed for pages directly under the application's root directory. For example: * [Not affected] `https://example.com/` * [Affected] `https://example.com/foo` * [Not affected] `https://example.com/foo/bar`. This issue is patched in Next.js `14.2.15` and later. If your Next.js application is hosted on Vercel, this vulnerability has been automatically mitigated, regardless of Next.js version. There are no official workarounds for this vulnerability. |
| CVE-2023-46298 | 7.5 | 0.00417 | 0.6182 | Next.js before 13.4.20-canary.13 lacks a cache-control header and thus empty prefetch responses may sometimes be cached by a CDN, causing a denial of service to all users requesting the same URL via that CDN. |
| CVE-2021-39178 | 7.5 | 0.007 | 0.72054 | Next.js is a React framework. Versions of Next.js between 10.0.0 and 11.0.0 contain a cross-site scripting vulnerability. In order for an instance to be affected by the vulnerability, the `next.config.js` file must have `images.domains` array assigned and the image host assigned in `images.domains` must allow user-provided SVG. If the `next.config.js` file has `images.loader` assigned to something other than default or the instance is deployed on Vercel, the instance is not affected by the vulnerability. The vulnerability is patched in Next.js version 11.1.1. |
| CVE-2026-27980 | 6.9 | 0.00021 | 0.05497 | Next.js is a React framework for building full-stack web applications. Starting in version 10.0.0 and prior to version 16.1.7, the default Next.js image optimization disk cache (`/_next/image`) did not have a configurable upper bound, allowing unbounded cache growth. An attacker could generate many unique image-optimization variants and exhaust disk space, causing denial of service. This is fixed in version 16.1.7 by adding an LRU-backed disk cache with `images.maximumDiskCacheSize`, including eviction of least-recently-used entries when the limit is exceeded. Setting `maximumDiskCacheSize: 0` disables disk caching. If upgrading is not immediately possible, periodically clean `.next/cache/images` and/or reduce variant cardinality (e.g., tighten values for `images.localPatterns`, `images.remotePatterns`, and `images.qualities`). |
| CVE-2025-57822 | 6.5 | 0.05626 | 0.90356 | Next.js is a React framework for building full-stack web applications. Prior to versions 14.2.32 and 15.4.7, when next() was used without explicitly passing the request object, it could lead to SSRF in self-hosted applications that incorrectly forwarded user-supplied headers. This vulnerability has been fixed in Next.js versions 14.2.32 and 15.4.7. All users implementing custom middleware logic in self-hosted environments are strongly encouraged to upgrade and verify correct usage of the next() function. |
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
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2025-13465 | 6.9 | 0.00029 | 0.08265 | Lodash versions 4.0.0 through 4.17.22 are vulnerable to prototype pollution in the _.unset and _.omit functions. An attacker can pass crafted paths which cause Lodash to delete methods from global prototypes. The issue permits deletion of properties but does not allow overwriting their original behavior. This issue is patched on 4.17.23 |
| CVE-2026-2950 | 6.5 | 0.00071 | 0.21734 | Impact: Lodash versions 4.17.23 and earlier are vulnerable to prototype pollution in the _.unset and _.omit functions. The fix for (CVE-2025-13465: https://github.com/lodash/lodash/security/advisories/GHSA-xxjr-mmjv-4gpg) only guards against string key members, so an attacker can bypass the check by passing array-wrapped path segments. This allows deletion of properties from built-in prototypes such as Object.prototype, Number.prototype, and String.prototype. The issue permits deletion of prototype properties but does not allow overwriting their original behavior. Patches: This issue is patched in 4.18.0. Workarounds: None. Upgrade to the patched version. |
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 |
| AWS Certificate Manager | SSL/TLS certificate authorities |
| Amazon CloudFront | CDN |
| Linkedin Ads | Advertising |
| Linkedin Insight Tag | Analytics |
| Emotion | JavaScript frameworks, Development |
| core-js 2.6.9 | JavaScript libraries |
| Next.js 10.2.3 | JavaScript frameworks, Web frameworks, Web servers, Static site generator |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| React | JavaScript frameworks |
| Sentry | Issue trackers |
| Three.js 149 | JavaScript graphics |
| Webpack | Miscellaneous |
| Contentful | CMS |
| Envoy | Reverse proxies |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| Lodash 4.17.21 | 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
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 | Method | Parameters | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| https://robinhood.com/gb/en/ | 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 | Different hostname found for a source file |
Vulnerability description
We have noticed that the target application includes scripts from external domains. This may be problematic as such scripts have the same level of access as the application's own scripts, which means they can interact with application data and perform actions as the current user.
Risk description
The risk is that cross domain file inclusion can lead to a wide variety security breaches if the external scripts are malicious or become compromised.
Recommendation
You do not have any control over what is in that code. Ensure files on the site are loaded from only trusted sources.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-829 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| URL | Method | Parameters | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| https://robinhood.com/gb/en/stocks-and-shares-isa/ | 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 |
|
Vulnerability description
We noticed that the target application is serving mixed content. This occurs when initial HTML is loaded over a secure HTTPS connection, but other resources (such as images, videos, stylesheets, scripts) are loaded over an insecure HTTP connection. This is called mixed content because both HTTP and HTTPS content are being loaded to display the same page, and the initial request was secure over HTTPS.
Risk description
The risk is that the insecurely loaded resources (HTTP) on an otherwise secure page (HTTPS) can be intercepted or manipulated by attackers, potentially leading to eavesdropping or content tampering.
Recommendation
Ensure that all external resources the page references are loaded using HTTPS.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-319 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://robinhood.com/gb/en/ | 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 |
Infrastructure Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:postmaster@robinhood.com; ruf=mailto:postmaster@robinhood.com; fo=0; adkim=r; aspf=r; rf=afrf" |
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
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:postmaster@robinhood.com; ruf=mailto:postmaster@robinhood.com; fo=0; adkim=r; aspf=r; rf=afrf" |
Vulnerability description
We found that the target uses p=quarantine in the DMARC policy. When a DMARC policy is set to p=quarantine, emails that fail DMARC validation are delivered but placed in the recipient’s spam or junk folder. Although it offers some protection, this policy is less strict than p=reject, which blocks such emails entirely.
Risk description
While emails failing DMARC validation are sent to the spam folder, users may still retrieve them from there, leading to a higher risk of phishing and spoofing attacks succeeding. Moreover, less strict enforcement may allow more fraudulent emails to reach user inboxes if misclassified.
Recommendation
We recommend considering moving to a stricter policy, such as p=reject, where emails that fail DMARC validation are completely rejected rather than delivered to spam folders. This reduces the risk of users interacting with potentially malicious emails.
Evidence
| DKIM selector | Key type | Key size | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| zendesk1 | rsa | 912 | "v=DKIM1;t=s;n=core;k=rsa;p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEA9IqdLrO3Zr2/56MHt8oQVCQorP0Bl2Fz9sM2tFBnJCdB/HogQmuudEg2xAovCN2PYpw44UijIvPuBoT9vxiv6ZCBJTLJXa82r6ke5rE4tbe9" "NKFIrVIb9S306cJDrnKFMDb8p0dU/Su0+eUR5gVAOtCuz2L8HAzs5edvsEvD/Fb4ny1RLNSEPZkIQLfGhVxQeWANm3+1Jwb/OBVXV9k0nKpWrpgqcmO7NzroJirp014RQY7rGi60JLUubc6XhvoFQBQrtOAdVlZC5wvfS1bgpq5kQpdP7cajIqWCeqxPTeo0ZUpey2ZcaygEsZz0Z3Gs5wDzyuqd7/ADpr2jNF7ozwIDAQAB" |
Vulnerability description
We found that the DKIM key length is under 1024-bit. When a DKIM (DomainKeys Identified Mail) key length is under 1024-bit, it is considered weak by modern cryptographic standards. Shorter key lengths, such as 512 or 768 bits, are vulnerable to brute-force attacks, where an attacker could potentially forge a valid DKIM signature for a domain. This undermines the entire purpose of DKIM, which is to authenticate email messages and prevent email spoofing by verifying that the message headers have not been tampered with. A DKIM key under 1024 bits significantly reduces the difficulty for attackers to break the signature.
Risk description
The primary risk of using a DKIM key with fewer than 1024 bits is that it weakens the domain's email authentication security, making it more susceptible to brute-force attacks. If an attacker successfully forges a DKIM signature, they can impersonate legitimate senders and send fraudulent or phishing emails that appear authentic to the recipient. This can lead to financial losses, reputational damage, and an increased risk of targeted attacks, as recipients are more likely to trust emails that pass DKIM verification.
Recommendation
We recommend using a DKIM key with a length of at least 1024 bits. Ideally, 2048-bit keys should be used, as they provide a higher level of security and are more resistant to brute-force attacks. Organizations should regularly audit their DKIM configurations and rotate cryptographic keys periodically to maintain security. In addition, any DKIM keys that are less than 1024 bits should be immediately replaced with stronger keys to prevent exploitation.
Evidence
We found insecure DNS cookie usage on the following nameservers: ns-1448.awsdns-53.org, ns-1717.awsdns-22.co.uk, ns-376.awsdns-47.com, ns-566.awsdns-06.net
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| robinhood.com | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 ip4:152.70.150.118 a:outbound.email.robinhood.com include:mail.zendesk.com include:amazonses.com include:_spf.google.com include:spf.mandrillapp.com include:mg-spf.greenhouse.io include:aristotle.com exists:%{i}._spf.mta.salesforce.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
We found insecure EDNS configuration on the following nameservers: ns-1448.awsdns-53.org, ns-1717.awsdns-22.co.uk, ns-566.awsdns-06.net ns-1448.awsdns-53.org:
ns-1717.awsdns-22.co.uk:
ns-566.awsdns-06.net:
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
| DKIM selector | Key type | Key size | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| rsa | 1296 | "v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQCX+wHwdCukBu2Ja/71Uv8Qx0bt6UFJEY1ZaQEFMFtOif0H2+rNkLNKJSH2FENdeW46duaw+S23Ks7fEK+QnyRt41dmOSAgkLPg15SssZUkRUy/a1uVUNFblRrxFfCt1zfl0t2/5a4o3vPCM09c8aWVrygekV2KoF6D20jAx/X9xwIDAQAB" | |
| m1 | rsa | 1296 | "k=rsa; t=s; p=MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDfg+lRqxBwJFwTW6m461kG06dLcpusOVP9UnL7mPyR3NJ4SFl8SShZTz4d1MjNeHk2Yime/A7MecyUaG0fAxD0eTaudWb7CwLOzEWEtY1M9y2spKWS/z8ueSZ7KAR5Qkvr320jqgtDjjI0DJP+fzV8j/biERS/8s4DOpTp4sY3gwIDAQAB" |
| mandrill | rsa | 1296 | "v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQCrLHiExVd55zd/IQ/J/mRwSRMAocV/hMB3jXwaHH36d9NaVynQFYV8NaWi69c1veUtRzGt7yAioXqLj7Z4TeEUoOLgrKsn8YnckGs9i3B3tVFB+Ch/4mPhXWiNfNdynHWBcPcbJ8kjEQ2U8y78dHZj1YeRXXVvWob2OaKynO8/lQIDAQAB" |
| s1 | rsa | 1446 | "k=rsa; t=s; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEA10fuOwmk1Awmnps1iFyKn0KopSfMFCoBGl9dCknmoma1NeQM4EdP7eId1JLWOlhdHXGQZRFc6zqUBGjJiwmGSZlvXIcPPFKnH03DebjnHco97tPsUPjyrnJLc/pBFH69tfwl8dEGyOIWOzMgNkQxn1eFPogw0ox8JAqP/+9Sn2djtIKlwZMOT2FH0XL46pJNZTRFm" "P/y6lUOWhlSqdJVjlFSMA0c0GAGNTArz0GmTnHtB2BWHbhJytx1Qjjj/Re/Lw7RReWvRCKbU6+9EgU/IA3QMEkcx4ta00mrPC+PnaBKbS4WeGnBiYCmnfV34//X7rM07JpyzdCkTMw3i3WQ8wIDAQAB" |
| s2 | rsa | 1296 | "k=rsa; t=s; p=MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDGcGkjs4Nt/7dUmls61LwJ0F+H2XwVKWrRBAa3/gP2A34FPEZxNHDsENZFJo7TgA55xjroOe6gLYfgL1Yy/umDEYeSWesIa2NLQYVCFiWf9++at3XYhNs5YfFq/TeCBPP9HRoPyakGv3GecKYU2iFEygQNS/sSKzNeNJCEPIYk6wIDAQAB" |
| smtpapi | rsa | 1296 | "k=rsa; t=s; p=MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDPtW5iwpXVPiH5FzJ7Nrl8USzuY9zqqzjE0D1r04xDN6qwziDnmgcFNNfMewVKN2D1O+2J9N14hRprzByFwfQW76yojh54Xu3uSbQ3JP0A7k8o8GutRF8zbFUA8n0ZH2y0cIEjMliXY4W4LwPA7m4q0ObmvSjhd63O9d8z1XkUBwIDAQAB" |
| zendesk1 | rsa | 912 | "v=DKIM1;t=s;n=core;k=rsa;p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEA9IqdLrO3Zr2/56MHt8oQVCQorP0Bl2Fz9sM2tFBnJCdB/HogQmuudEg2xAovCN2PYpw44UijIvPuBoT9vxiv6ZCBJTLJXa82r6ke5rE4tbe9" "NKFIrVIb9S306cJDrnKFMDb8p0dU/Su0+eUR5gVAOtCuz2L8HAzs5edvsEvD/Fb4ny1RLNSEPZkIQLfGhVxQeWANm3+1Jwb/OBVXV9k0nKpWrpgqcmO7NzroJirp014RQY7rGi60JLUubc6XhvoFQBQrtOAdVlZC5wvfS1bgpq5kQpdP7cajIqWCeqxPTeo0ZUpey2ZcaygEsZz0Z3Gs5wDzyuqd7/ADpr2jNF7ozwIDAQAB" |
Evidence
| Operating System | Accuracy |
|---|---|
| Crestron XPanel control system | 87% |
Vulnerability description
OS Detection
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Contentful | CMS |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Envoy | Reverse proxies |
| Amazon Web Services | PaaS |
| Stripe | Payment processors |
| BitPay | Payment processors |
| Amazon S3 | CDN |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| Linkedin Insight Tag | Analytics |
| Linkedin Ads | Advertising |
| HSTS | Security |
| AWS Certificate Manager | SSL/TLS certificate authorities |
| Amazon CloudFront | CDN |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| robinhood.com | A | IPv4 address | 13.226.244.129 |
| robinhood.com | A | IPv4 address | 13.226.244.36 |
| robinhood.com | A | IPv4 address | 13.226.244.41 |
| robinhood.com | A | IPv4 address | 13.226.244.66 |
| robinhood.com | NS | Name server | ns-1448.awsdns-53.org |
| robinhood.com | NS | Name server | ns-1717.awsdns-22.co.uk |
| robinhood.com | NS | Name server | ns-376.awsdns-47.com |
| robinhood.com | NS | Name server | ns-566.awsdns-06.net |
| robinhood.com | MX | Mail server | 1 aspmx.l.google.com |
| robinhood.com | MX | Mail server | 10 aspmx2.googlemail.com |
| robinhood.com | MX | Mail server | 10 aspmx3.googlemail.com |
| robinhood.com | MX | Mail server | 5 alt1.aspmx.l.google.com |
| robinhood.com | MX | Mail server | 5 alt2.aspmx.l.google.com |
| robinhood.com | SOA | Start of Authority | ns-1448.awsdns-53.org. awsdns-hostmaster.amazon.com. 1 7200 900 1209600 86400 |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "3121037" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "MS=ms37860350" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "adobe-idp-site-verification=337b49da39d5e893bd1cfb2ea676c82c0f58829a8328c97ad118ffff68f083ff" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "anthropic-domain-verification-1fgmw0=G7VNxcOvvV2ZsgU73gw9QA0pJ" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "apple-domain-verification=NNk0iX2sP06iOm8X" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "apple-domain-verification=fQoNAnWdU1uR_z9DwzPE2ugCHuzIC4IrmdSnFXM1q9M" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "atlassian-domain-verification=pJXlDoka7BtrtfifCE5D23RKMl2offYcXo9aJwLoWUJvupad7gycHRr6WQhaZSiM" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "cloudflare_dashboard_sso=80d9c378b773e3e5bd266905f08e3ad9" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "cloudflare_dashboard_sso=bdda026f7902504cd7cf56ab0431c86c" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "docker-verification=84a32f24-69e6-4abc-8f1d-c3bd63d84bcb" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "docusign=46fcbd24-163b-4096-9c14-94c405f4cff6" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "docusign=a1debf77-faad-442a-a876-caca91dc1524" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "dropbox-domain-verification=dyrk58kqgdmu" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "facebook-domain-verification=0jxcn748uz6b8drqoohl7zgx7n9v1r" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=0Fdchx2Vxh-dBKyqS0511gdVcqGALFOAIdx-jzj9gjM" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=5yUdgL3NScf1Det_yKjAvAZub5XgcJSSHHvougBh_jw" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=D99vnCS8NaROiaHHSYWAVM-z62rNx2e3nsf4ByCBSys" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=JEA9gSTIxxUK8YJFYEw52vrOxAWq-ST0O52iav-ZpOQ" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=JrBLPC7WcxAw1i2CmJ08imTMVXa7fXmYxqkUiGYcXMM" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=VUuzGLQnd9n9hyAN1YCbPXRo_0A4bWwSyQYdGVO_vW4" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=f_TAbAM_p9fGgl3c7ssq81SGfbkz11ytgeQaZy6s3ro" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=o7Er0N4wiSC49Fpg0DnJlB5eX6EFgUTkqKtfaS3hZoA" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=uvnRH5-xSB7gwALFXBzJBGbFQ-MslFq5KipvjJnaebg" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "h1-domain-verification=y9uaWoUydiViekWLETvSYEDX6U4y1fWc4Huap2hXU3teHaif" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "have-i-been-pwned-verification=b9ccca1f8a1a23a4a910774f1e65110e" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "infoblox-domain-mastery=23c54b6631fcf04d6f82c9a513cdfa3b828a51febebb3a1c3ddc7035412730d9f6" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "loaderio=3b374e0e01eb22cea519ca4cb508509c" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "openai-domain-verification=dv-ot7KP9Cf5PkMgB8x9u19XL87" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "parallels-domain-verification=17b8d8294e2a40d1abc4f7ac568054a6f206bd8741b249c7851f52ffb455cf0a" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "piktochart-site-verification=BzQ8UclActSTceUD9KOp2tOrZUrtrGMLkyvY" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "postman-domain-verification=c47965ef45e7c791defb69cc6f8012bcb550663cc54f2cfd47586cd1b82e9e6ecaa1fd2a14594173f1ef5f8f992d2746af51594b5988347997342b837c47858f" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "shopify-verification-code=yENf3C2TY4jAOlTHeO8EJaiNOz7Q5L" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "smartsheet-site-validation=BtII9pDIXfTlL6OB0xo-BZtKkX1oQAY6" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "sterling-verification= d2b379398f184390a49ff7cc7ecd79fe" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "stripe-verification=406cc480b56e3009de92277a941ec8c8e657be14ca3d87fd301841ca97da91b3" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "stripe-verification=54ab59832e81c89b5536467238a88573ee4d7513f51c270eea5f9de0ddfd9b70" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "stripe-verification=7aedd4a55386e529b45b6a42bfae6ea98136481455e48d66c31da1126bc230d0" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "stripe-verification=eea2d9a26c727d703b3ac9f83baf40c9367e3881625335218d7cacb0c1ec783c" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "stripe-verification=fcc2904251a14a11eb0f1765ec6f2f909e5f200c34bdb15def4b400c9c34fd52" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "twilio-domain-verification=503e21f89f84b91b80b7ca14d72ac14f" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "verification_token=VU3Tx9WyDdmvWE0o1JygB0p8B" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "warpstream-verification=HJrMnZcumnuTlhjcdbEYZw==" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "wrike-verification=NjMzMTU3NzoyNjcwYzcxOWUyYmRmNTllNGVkMzA1NTcwZTZjNDU5MjIyZjJjNzQzNDI1ZDBjYTJlMWVmMjZjMTQwOWE4NDVl" |
| robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "zapier-domain-verification-challenge=f169105f-bdb3-4c96-a0f0-bd8ea24300b8" |
| robinhood.com | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 ip4:152.70.150.118 a:outbound.email.robinhood.com include:mail.zendesk.com include:amazonses.com include:_spf.google.com include:spf.mandrillapp.com include:mg-spf.greenhouse.io include:aristotle.com exists:%{i}._spf.mta.salesforce.com ~all" |
| robinhood.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 iodef "mailto:caa-group@robinhood.com" |
| robinhood.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "amazonaws.com" |
| robinhood.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "cloudflare.com" |
| robinhood.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "comodoca.com" |
| robinhood.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "digicert.com" |
| robinhood.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "letsencrypt.org" |
| robinhood.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issuewild "amazonaws.com" |
| robinhood.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issuewild "cloudflare.com" |
| robinhood.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issuewild "comodoca.com" |
| robinhood.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issuewild "digicert.com" |
| robinhood.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issuewild "letsencrypt.org" |
| _dmarc.robinhood.com | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:postmaster@robinhood.com; ruf=mailto:postmaster@robinhood.com; fo=0; adkim=r; aspf=r; rf=afrf" |
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.