Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | |
| Description: |
| ip_address | 178.79.134.182 |
| country | GB  |
| network_name | Akamai Technologies Inc |
| asn | AS63949 |
80/tcp | http | nginx 1.29.0 |
81/tcp | https | nginx 1.29.0 |
443/tcp | https | nginx 1.29.0 |
4280/tcp | https | nginx 1.29.0 |
4445/tcp | ssh | OpenSSH 8.4p1 Debian 5+deb11u5 |
5013/tcp | https | nginx 1.29.0 |
6379/tcp | redis | Redis key-value store 5.0.7 |
7001/tcp | https | Oracle WebLogic admin httpd - |
9000/tcp | https | nginx 1.29.0 |
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| cdnjs | CDN |
| Bootstrap | UI frameworks |
| Google Font API | Font scripts |
| jQuery 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Nginx 1.29.0 | Web servers, Reverse proxies |
| OWL Carousel | JavaScript libraries |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| URL | Cookie Name | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| https://pentest-ground.com:81/ | SessionID | Set-Cookie: SessionID=encrypted-session-id |
Vulnerability description
We found that a cookie has been set without the Secure flag, which means the browser will send it over an unencrypted channel (plain HTTP) if such a request is made. The root cause for this usually revolves around misconfigurations in the code or server settings.
Risk description
The risk exists that an attacker will intercept the clear-text communication between the browser and the server and he will steal the cookie of the user. If this is a session cookie, the attacker could gain unauthorized access to the victim's web session.
Recommendation
Whenever a cookie contains sensitive information or is a session token, then it should always be passed using an encrypted channel. Ensure that the secure flag is set for cookies containing such sensitive information.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-614 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| URL | Cookie Name | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| https://pentest-ground.com:81/ | SessionID | The server responded with Set-Cookie header(s) that does not specify the HttpOnly flag: Set-Cookie: SessionID=encrypted-session-id |
Vulnerability description
We found that a cookie has been set without the HttpOnly flag, which means it can be accessed by potentially malicious JavaScript code running inside the web page. The root cause for this usually revolves around misconfigurations in the code or server settings.
Risk description
The risk is that an attacker who injects malicious JavaScript code on the page (e.g. by using an XSS attack) can access the cookie and can send it to another site. In case of a session cookie, this could lead to session hijacking.
Recommendation
Ensure that the HttpOnly flag is set for all cookies.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-1004 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| Risk Level | CVSS | CVE | Summary | Affected software |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4.3 | CVE-2020-11023 | In jQuery versions greater than or equal to 1.0.3 and before 3.5.0, passing HTML containing <option> elements from untrusted sources - even after sanitizing it - to one of jQuery's DOM manipulation methods (i.e. .html(), .append(), and others) may execute untrusted code. This problem is patched in jQuery 3.5.0. | jquery 3.4.1 | |
| 4.3 | CVE-2020-11022 | In jQuery versions greater than or equal to 1.2 and before 3.5.0, passing HTML from untrusted sources - even after sanitizing it - to one of jQuery's DOM manipulation methods (i.e. .html(), .append(), and others) may execute untrusted code. This problem is patched in jQuery 3.5.0. | jquery 3.4.1 |
Vulnerability description
We noticed known vulnerabilities in the target application based on the server responses. They are usually related to outdated systems and expose the affected applications to the risk of unauthorized access to confidential data and possibly denial of service attacks. Depending on the system distribution the affected software can be patched but displays the same version, requiring manual checking.
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-1026 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://pentest-ground.com:81/ | 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 |
|---|---|
| https://pentest-ground.com:81/ | 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://pentest-ground.com:81/about | 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 Cookies: SessionID=encrypted-session-id |
|
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-311 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://pentest-ground.com:81/ | 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 | Method | Parameters | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| https://pentest-ground.com:81/contact | 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 Cookies: SessionID=encrypted-session-id | Suspicious comment TODO found in: |
Vulnerability description
We have discovered that the target application's code contains suspicious comments that may be related to potential bugs, incomplete functionality, or weaknesses. These comments often arise during development and testing phases but are inadvertently left in the code.
Risk description
The risk exists that attackers could analyze these comments to identify vulnerabilities or weaknesses in the application. While comments themselves do not directly lead to security breaches, they may guide attackers to focus their efforts on specific parts of the application, potentially uncovering and exploiting vulnerabilities.
Recommendation
Remove comments that suggest the presence of bugs, incomplete functionality, or weaknesses, before deploying the application.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-209 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| cdnjs | CDN |
| Bootstrap | UI frameworks |
| Google Font API | Font scripts |
| jQuery 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Nginx 1.29.0 | Web servers, Reverse proxies |
| OWL Carousel | JavaScript libraries |
| 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
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://pentest-ground.com:81/ | Response headers do not include the HTTP Strict-Transport-Security header |
Vulnerability description
We noticed that the target application lacks the HTTP Strict-Transport-Security header in its responses. This security header is crucial as it instructs browsers to only establish secure (HTTPS) connections with the web server and reject any HTTP connections.
Risk description
The risk is that lack of this header permits an attacker to force a victim user to initiate a clear-text HTTP connection to the server, thus opening the possibility to eavesdrop on the network traffic and extract sensitive information (e.g. session cookies).
Recommendation
The Strict-Transport-Security HTTP header should be sent with each HTTPS response. The syntax is as follows: `Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=<seconds>[; includeSubDomains]` The parameter `max-age` gives the time frame for requirement of HTTPS in seconds and should be chosen quite high, e.g. several months. A value below 7776000 is considered as too low by this scanner check. The flag `includeSubDomains` defines that the policy applies also for sub domains of the sender of the response.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-693 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| URL | Method | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| https://pentest-ground.com:81/ | OPTIONS | We did a HTTP OPTIONS request. The server responded with a 200 status code and the header: `Allow: HEAD, GET, OPTIONS` Request / Response |
Vulnerability description
We have noticed that the webserver responded with an Allow HTTP header when an OPTIONS HTTP request was sent. This method responds to requests by providing information about the methods available for the target resource.
Risk description
The only risk this might present nowadays is revealing debug HTTP methods that can be used on the server. This can present a danger if any of those methods can lead to sensitive information, like authentication information, secret keys.
Recommendation
We recommend that you check for unused HTTP methods or even better, disable the OPTIONS method. This can be done using your webserver configuration.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-16 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://pentest-ground.com:81/login |
|
Vulnerability description
We have discovered that the target application presents a login interface that could be a potential target for attacks. While login interfaces are standard for user authentication, they can become vulnerabilities if not properly secured.
Risk description
The risk is that an attacker could use this interface to mount brute force attacks against known passwords and usernames combinations leaked throughout the web.
Recommendation
Ensure each interface is not bypassable using common knowledge of the application or leaked credentials using occasional password audits.
Vulnerability description
We have noticed that the server is missing the security.txt file, which is considered a good practice for web security. It provides a standardized way for security researchers and the public to report security vulnerabilities or concerns by outlining the preferred method of contact and reporting procedures.
Risk description
There is no particular risk in not having a security.txt file for your server. However, this file is important because it offers a designated channel for reporting vulnerabilities and security issues.
Recommendation
We recommend you to implement the security.txt file according to the standard, in order to allow researchers or users report any security issues they find, improving the defensive mechanisms of your server.
Evidence
| URL | Method | Parameters | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| https://pentest-ground.com:81/ | 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: demo@gmail.com |
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 |
Evidence
Vulnerability description
Website is accessible.
Infrastructure Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | CISA KEV | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2021-32762 | 9 | 0.01083 | 0.76905 | No | Redis is an open source, in-memory database that persists on disk. The redis-cli command line tool and redis-sentinel service may be vulnerable to integer overflow when parsing specially crafted large multi-bulk network replies. This is a result of a vulnerability in the underlying hiredis library which does not perform an overflow check before calling the calloc() heap allocation function. This issue only impacts systems with heap allocators that do not perform their own overflow checks. Most modern systems do and are therefore not likely to be affected. Furthermore, by default redis-sentinel uses the jemalloc allocator which is also not vulnerable. The problem is fixed in Redis versions 6.2.6, 6.0.16 and 5.0.14. |
| CVE-2022-24834 | 7 | 0.29967 | 0.96428 | No | Redis is an in-memory database that persists on disk. A specially crafted Lua script executing in Redis can trigger a heap overflow in the cjson library, and result with heap corruption and potentially remote code execution. The problem exists in all versions of Redis with Lua scripting support, starting from 2.6, and affects only authenticated and authorized users. The problem is fixed in versions 7.0.12, 6.2.13, and 6.0.20. |
| CVE-2022-24735 | 6.8 | 0.01946 | 0.82638 | No | Redis is an in-memory database that persists on disk. By exploiting weaknesses in the Lua script execution environment, an attacker with access to Redis prior to version 7.0.0 or 6.2.7 can inject Lua code that will execute with the (potentially higher) privileges of another Redis user. The Lua script execution environment in Redis provides some measures that prevent a script from creating side effects that persist and can affect the execution of the same, or different script, at a later time. Several weaknesses of these measures have been publicly known for a long time, but they had no security impact as the Redis security model did not endorse the concept of users or privileges. With the introduction of ACLs in Redis 6.0, these weaknesses can be exploited by a less privileged users to inject Lua code that will execute at a later time, when a privileged user executes a Lua script. The problem is fixed in Redis versions 7.0.0 and 6.2.7. An additional workaround to mitigate this problem without patching the redis-server executable, if Lua scripting is not being used, is to block access to `SCRIPT LOAD` and `EVAL` commands using ACL rules. |
| CVE-2021-21309 | 6.5 | 0.00465 | 0.63431 | No | Redis is an open-source, in-memory database that persists on disk. In affected versions of Redis an integer overflow bug in 32-bit Redis version 4.0 or newer could be exploited to corrupt the heap and potentially result with remote code execution. Redis 4.0 or newer uses a configurable limit for the maximum supported bulk input size. By default, it is 512MB which is a safe value for all platforms. If the limit is significantly increased, receiving a large request from a client may trigger several integer overflow scenarios, which would result with buffer overflow and heap corruption. We believe this could in certain conditions be exploited for remote code execution. By default, authenticated Redis users have access to all configuration parameters and can therefore use the “CONFIG SET proto-max-bulk-len” to change the safe default, making the system vulnerable. **This problem only affects 32-bit Redis (on a 32-bit system, or as a 32-bit executable running on a 64-bit system).** The problem is fixed in version 6.2, and the fix is back ported to 6.0.11 and 5.0.11. Make sure you use one of these versions if you are running 32-bit Redis. An additional workaround to mitigate the problem without patching the redis-server executable is to prevent clients from directly executing `CONFIG SET`: Using Redis 6.0 or newer, ACL configuration can be used to block the command. Using older versions, the `rename-command` configuration directive can be used to rename the command to a random string unknown to users, rendering it inaccessible. Please note that this workaround may have an additional impact on users or operational systems that expect `CONFIG SET` to behave in certain ways. |
| CVE-2021-32626 | 6.5 | 0.01272 | 0.78635 | No | Redis is an open source, in-memory database that persists on disk. In affected versions specially crafted Lua scripts executing in Redis can cause the heap-based Lua stack to be overflowed, due to incomplete checks for this condition. This can result with heap corruption and potentially remote code execution. This problem exists in all versions of Redis with Lua scripting support, starting from 2.6. The problem is fixed in versions 6.2.6, 6.0.16 and 5.0.14. For users unable to update an additional workaround to mitigate the problem without patching the redis-server executable is to prevent users from executing Lua scripts. This can be done using ACL to restrict EVAL and EVALSHA commands. |
| CVE-2021-32761 | 6 | 0.00635 | 0.69503 | No | Redis is an in-memory database that persists on disk. A vulnerability involving out-of-bounds read and integer overflow to buffer overflow exists starting with version 2.2 and prior to versions 5.0.13, 6.0.15, and 6.2.5. On 32-bit systems, Redis `*BIT*` command are vulnerable to integer overflow that can potentially be exploited to corrupt the heap, leak arbitrary heap contents or trigger remote code execution. The vulnerability involves changing the default `proto-max-bulk-len` configuration parameter to a very large value and constructing specially crafted commands bit commands. This problem only affects Redis on 32-bit platforms, or compiled as a 32-bit binary. Redis versions 5.0.`3m 6.0.15, and 6.2.5 contain patches for this issue. An additional workaround to mitigate the problem without patching the `redis-server` executable is to prevent users from modifying the `proto-max-bulk-len` configuration parameter. This can be done using ACL to restrict unprivileged users from using the CONFIG SET command. |
| CVE-2021-32627 | 6 | 0.00797 | 0.73052 | No | Redis is an open source, in-memory database that persists on disk. In affected versions an integer overflow bug in Redis can be exploited to corrupt the heap and potentially result with remote code execution. The vulnerability involves changing the default proto-max-bulk-len and client-query-buffer-limit configuration parameters to very large values and constructing specially crafted very large stream elements. The problem is fixed in Redis 6.2.6, 6.0.16 and 5.0.14. For users unable to upgrade an additional workaround to mitigate the problem without patching the redis-server executable is to prevent users from modifying the proto-max-bulk-len configuration parameter. This can be done using ACL to restrict unprivileged users from using the CONFIG SET command. |
| CVE-2021-3470 | 5 | 0.00538 | 0.66614 | No | A heap overflow issue was found in Redis in versions before 5.0.10, before 6.0.9 and before 6.2.0 when using a heap allocator other than jemalloc or glibc's malloc, leading to potential out of bound write or process crash. Effectively this flaw does not affect the vast majority of users, who use jemalloc or glibc malloc. |
| CVE-2020-21468 | 5 | 0.00497 | 0.6487 | No | A segmentation fault in the redis-server component of Redis 5.0.7 leads to a denial of service (DOS). NOTE: the vendor cannot reproduce this issue in a released version, such as 5.0.7 |
| CVE-2015-8080 | 5 | 0.02324 | 0.84147 | No | Integer overflow in the getnum function in lua_struct.c in Redis 2.8.x before 2.8.24 and 3.0.x before 3.0.6 allows context-dependent attackers with permission to run Lua code in a Redis session to cause a denial of service (memory corruption and application crash) or possibly bypass intended sandbox restrictions via a large number, which triggers a stack-based buffer overflow. |
Vulnerability description
Vulnerabilities found for Redis Key-Value Store 5.0.7
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
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | CISA KEV | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2020-11023 | 4.3 | 0.21757 | 0.95463 | Yes | In jQuery versions greater than or equal to 1.0.3 and before 3.5.0, passing HTML containing <option> elements from untrusted sources - even after sanitizing it - to one of jQuery's DOM manipulation methods (i.e. .html(), .append(), and others) may execute untrusted code. This problem is patched in jQuery 3.5.0. |
| CVE-2020-11022 | 4.3 | 0.23711 | 0.95733 | No | In jQuery versions greater than or equal to 1.2 and before 3.5.0, passing HTML from untrusted sources - even after sanitizing it - to one of jQuery's DOM manipulation methods (i.e. .html(), .append(), and others) may execute untrusted code. This problem is patched in jQuery 3.5.0. |
Vulnerability description
Vulnerabilities found for jQuery 3.4.1
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 managed to detect a publicly accessible SSH service. Starting Nmap ( https://nmap.org ) at 2025-07-18 15:21 EEST Nmap scan report for pentest-ground.com (178.79.134.182) Host is up (0.0013s latency). rDNS record for 178.79.134.182: 178-79-134-182.ip.linodeusercontent.com
PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION 4445/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 0.44 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 Redis service. PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION 6379/tcp open redis Redis key-value store 5.0.7
Vulnerability description
We found that the Redis service is publicly accessible. This service often holds critical organizational data, making it a potential prime target for determined attackers.
Risk description
The risk exists that an attacker exploits this issue by launching a password-based attack on the Redis service. If an attacker identifies a correct set of login details, they could gain access to the database and start enumerating, potentially revealing confidential information. Moreover, such vulnerabilities could lead to other forms of attacks, including privilege escalation, allowing attackers to run system commands and move laterally to other systems in the internal network.
Recommendation
We recommend ensuring that the Redis service is not publicly accessible. The Redis service should be safeguarded behind a firewall or made available only to users connected through a Virtual Private Network (VPN) server. However, if the Redis service is required to be directly accessible over the Internet, we recommend reconfiguring it such that it is accessible only from known IP addresses.
Evidence
We found insecure DNS cookie usage on the following nameservers: ns1.linode.com, ns3.linode.com, ns4.linode.com, ns5.linode.com, ns2.linode.com
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
We managed to detect that Redis key-value store has reached the End-of-Life (EOL).
Version detected: 5.0.7 End-of-life date: 2022-04-27 Latest version for the cycle: 5.0.14 This release cycle (5.0) doesn't have long-term-support (LTS). The cycle was released on 2018-10-17 and its latest release date was 2021-10-04. The support ended on 2020-04-30.
Risk description
Using end-of-life (EOL) software poses significant security risks for organizations. EOL software no longer receives updates, including critical security patches. This creates a vulnerability landscape where known and potentially new security flaws remain unaddressed, making the software an attractive target for malicious actors. Attackers can exploit these vulnerabilities to gain unauthorized access, disrupt services, or steal sensitive data. Moreover, without updates, compatibility issues arise with newer technologies, leading to operational inefficiencies and increased potential for system failures. Additionally, regulatory and compliance risks accompany the use of EOL software. Many industries have strict data protection regulations that require up-to-date software to ensure the highest security standards. Non-compliance can result in hefty fines and legal consequences. Organizations also risk damaging their reputation if a breach occurs due to outdated software, eroding customer trust and potentially leading to a loss of business. Therefore, continuing to use EOL software undermines both security posture and business integrity, necessitating timely upgrades and proactive risk management strategies.
Recommendation
To mitigate the risks associated with end-of-life (EOL) software, it's crucial to take proactive steps. Start by identifying any EOL software currently in use within your organization. Once identified, prioritize upgrading or replacing these applications with supported versions that receive regular updates and security patches. This not only helps close security gaps but also ensures better compatibility with newer technologies, enhancing overall system efficiency and reliability.Additionally, develop a comprehensive software lifecycle management plan. This plan should include regular audits to identify upcoming EOL dates and a schedule for timely updates or replacements. Train your IT staff and users about the importance of keeping software up to date and the risks associated with using outdated versions. By maintaining a proactive approach to software management, you can significantly reduce security risks, ensure compliance with industry regulations, and protect your organization's reputation and customer trust.
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Bootstrap | UI frameworks |
| Nginx 1.29.0 | Web servers, Reverse proxies |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| OWL Carousel | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| cdnjs | 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 |
|---|---|
| Tailwind CSS | UI frameworks |
| Nginx 1.29.0 | Web servers, Reverse proxies |
| Unpkg | CDN |
| Tippy.js 6 | JavaScript libraries |
| jsDelivr | CDN |
| Fathom | Analytics |
| Popper 2 | 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
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| pentest-ground.com | A | IPv4 address | 178.79.134.182 |
| pentest-ground.com | NS | Name server | ns1.linode.com |
| pentest-ground.com | NS | Name server | ns3.linode.com |
| pentest-ground.com | NS | Name server | ns4.linode.com |
| pentest-ground.com | NS | Name server | ns5.linode.com |
| pentest-ground.com | NS | Name server | ns2.linode.com |
| pentest-ground.com | MX | Mail server | 10 mail.pentest-ground.com |
| pentest-ground.com | SOA | Start of Authority | ns1.linode.com. admin2.admin.test. 2021000154 14400 14400 1209600 86400 |
| pentest-ground.com | CAA | Certificate Authority Authorization | 0 issue "letsencrypt.org" |
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
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| PHP 8.4.10 | Programming languages |
| Nginx 1.29.0 | Web servers, Reverse proxies |
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 |
|---|---|
| Tailwind CSS | UI frameworks |
| Nginx 1.29.0 | Web servers, Reverse proxies |
| Alpine.js 3.13.0 | JavaScript frameworks |
| Unpkg | CDN |
| jsDelivr | CDN |
| CookieYes | Cookie compliance |
| Tippy.js 6 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Google Analytics | Analytics |
| Fathom | Analytics |
| Popper 2 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Java | Programming languages |
| JavaServer Pages | Web frameworks |
| Weblogic Server | Web servers |
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 |
|---|---|
| Bootstrap | UI frameworks |
| Nginx 1.29.0 | Web servers, Reverse proxies |
| jQuery | JavaScript libraries |
| Fathom | Analytics |
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
| Operating System | Accuracy |
|---|---|
| Linux 4.15 - 5.6 | 100% |
Vulnerability description
OS Detection