Vulnerability Scan Result

ip_address | 172.67.164.149 |
country | - |
network_name | Cloudflare Inc |
asn | AS13335 |
ip_address | 104.21.91.14 |
country | - |
network_name | Cloudflare Inc |
asn | AS13335 |
80/tcp | http | Cloudflare http proxy - |
443/tcp | https | cloudflare - |
2082/tcp | http | Cloudflare http proxy - |
2083/tcp | https | nginx - |
2086/tcp | http | Cloudflare http proxy - |
2087/tcp | https | nginx - |
8080/tcp | http | Cloudflare http proxy - |
8443/tcp | http | cloudflare - |
Software / Version | Category |
---|---|
core-js 3.37.1 | JavaScript libraries |
HTTP/3 | Miscellaneous |
PHP 8.2.28 | Programming languages |
React | JavaScript frameworks |
React Router 6 | JavaScript frameworks |
PWA | Miscellaneous |
Cloudflare | CDN |
Lodash 4.17.21 | JavaScript libraries |
Webpushr | Marketing automation |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
URL | Response URL | Evidence |
---|---|---|
http://gana365.online/ | http://gana365.online/ | Communication is made over unsecure, unencrypted HTTP. |
Vulnerability description
We noticed that the communication between the web browser and the server is done using the HTTP protocol, which transmits data unencrypted over the network.
Risk description
The risk is that an attacker who manages to intercept the communication at the network level can read and modify the data transmitted (including passwords, secret tokens, credit card information and other sensitive data).
Recommendation
We recommend you to reconfigure the web server to use HTTPS - which encrypts the communication between the web browser and the server.
Classification
CWE | CWE-311 |
OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
URL | Evidence |
---|---|
http://gana365.online/ | 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 |
---|---|
http://gana365.online/ | 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 |
---|---|
http://gana365.online/ | 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
Software / Version | Category |
---|---|
core-js 3.37.1 | JavaScript libraries |
HTTP/3 | Miscellaneous |
PHP 8.2.28 | Programming languages |
React | JavaScript frameworks |
React Router 6 | JavaScript frameworks |
PWA | Miscellaneous |
Cloudflare | CDN |
Lodash 4.17.21 | JavaScript libraries |
Webpushr | Marketing automation |
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
Vulnerability description
Website is accessible.
Infrastructure Vulnerabilities
Evidence
CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | CISA KEV | Summary |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CVE-2024-4577 | 9.8 | 0.94412 | 0.99973 | Yes | In PHP versions 8.1.* before 8.1.29, 8.2.* before 8.2.20, 8.3.* before 8.3.8, when using Apache and PHP-CGI on Windows, if the system is set up to use certain code pages, Windows may use "Best-Fit" behavior to replace characters in command line given to Win32 API functions. PHP CGI module may misinterpret those characters as PHP options, which may allow a malicious user to pass options to PHP binary being run, and thus reveal the source code of scripts, run arbitrary PHP code on the server, etc. |
CVE-2024-11236 | 9.8 | 0.00372 | 0.58125 | No | In PHP versions 8.1.* before 8.1.31, 8.2.* before 8.2.26, 8.3.* before 8.3.14, uncontrolled long string inputs to ldap_escape() function on 32-bit systems can cause an integer overflow, resulting in an out-of-bounds write. |
CVE-2024-1874 | 9.4 | 0.54606 | 0.97875 | No | In PHP versions 8.1.* before 8.1.28, 8.2.* before 8.2.18, 8.3.* before 8.3.5, when using proc_open() command with array syntax, due to insufficient escaping, if the arguments of the executed command are controlled by a malicious user, the user can supply arguments that would execute arbitrary commands in Windows shell. |
CVE-2024-5585 | 7.7 | 0.00794 | 0.72927 | No | In PHP versions 8.1.* before 8.1.29, 8.2.* before 8.2.20, 8.3.* before 8.3.8, the fix for CVE-2024-1874 does not work if the command name includes trailing spaces. Original issue: when using proc_open() command with array syntax, due to insufficient escaping, if the arguments of the executed command are controlled by a malicious user, the user can supply arguments that would execute arbitrary commands in Windows shell. |
CVE-2024-3096 | 6.5 | 0.00205 | 0.43017 | No | In PHP version 8.1.* before 8.1.28, 8.2.* before 8.2.18, 8.3.* before 8.3.5, if a password stored with password_hash() starts with a null byte (\x00), testing a blank string as the password via password_verify() will incorrectly return true. |
Vulnerability description
Vulnerabilities found for PHP 8.1.22
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 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.
Evidence
DKIM selector | Key type | Key size | Value |
---|---|---|---|
rsa | 1296 | "v=DKIM1; g=*; k=rsa; p=MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDBD5JjXfQUAfQwUzUO2mCHwN29WLjcZVlrdP2bIEF7wfLu28IlElEcudbSk/3Y2WNx+YSJDx70RjUGpDbLehmjJixVUAGtWQ/VhHzRjs/w3x0g/0Jpe5HYPfOYp2+K9Z/MIjjH0QjEQxccLWoJ7FK1BG4mZUPJF823W0z9vrh1rQIDAQAB" |
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
Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
---|---|---|---|
gana365.online | A | IPv4 address | 172.67.164.149 |
gana365.online | A | IPv4 address | 104.21.91.14 |
gana365.online | NS | Name server | achiel.ns.cloudflare.com |
gana365.online | NS | Name server | paris.ns.cloudflare.com |
gana365.online | MX | Mail server | 0 mail.gana365.online |
gana365.online | MX | Mail server | 20 mx1.gana365.online |
gana365.online | SOA | Start of Authority | achiel.ns.cloudflare.com. dns.cloudflare.com. 2376750871 10000 2400 604800 1800 |
gana365.online | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2606:4700:3032::6815:5b0e |
gana365.online | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2606:4700:3033::ac43:a495 |
gana365.online | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 include:spf.hostmar.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
Operating System | Accuracy |
---|---|
FreeBSD 11.1-STABLE | 91% |
Vulnerability description
OS Detection
Evidence
Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
---|---|---|---|
gana365.online | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 include:spf.hostmar.com -all" |
Evidence
DKIM selector | Key type | Key size | Value |
---|---|---|---|
rsa | 1296 | "v=DKIM1; g=*; k=rsa; p=MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDBD5JjXfQUAfQwUzUO2mCHwN29WLjcZVlrdP2bIEF7wfLu28IlElEcudbSk/3Y2WNx+YSJDx70RjUGpDbLehmjJixVUAGtWQ/VhHzRjs/w3x0g/0Jpe5HYPfOYp2+K9Z/MIjjH0QjEQxccLWoJ7FK1BG4mZUPJF823W0z9vrh1rQIDAQAB" |
Evidence
Software / Version | Category |
---|---|
PHP 8.2.28 | Programming languages |
Webpushr | Marketing automation |
Cloudflare | CDN |
HTTP/3 | Miscellaneous |
PWA | 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.
Evidence
Software / Version | Category |
---|---|
Webpushr | Marketing automation |
Cloudflare | CDN |
HTTP/3 | Miscellaneous |
PWA | 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.
Evidence
Software / Version | Category |
---|---|
Cloudflare | CDN |
HTTP/3 | 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.
Evidence
Software / Version | Category |
---|---|
Cloudflare | CDN |
HTTP/3 | 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.
Evidence
Software / Version | Category |
---|---|
Cloudflare | 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
Software / Version | Category |
---|---|
PHP 8.1.22 | Programming languages |
jQuery | JavaScript libraries |
Slick | JavaScript libraries |
Cloudflare | CDN |
HTTP/3 | Miscellaneous |
Open Graph | 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.
Evidence
Software / Version | Category |
---|---|
Cloudflare | 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.