Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | QlssNew |
| Description: | No description found |
| ip_address | 156.67.222.63 |
| country | SG  |
| network_name | Hostinger International Limited |
| asn | AS47583 |
21/tcp | ftp | ProFTPD or KnFTPD - |
80/tcp | http | LiteSpeed httpd - |
443/tcp | https | LiteSpeed httpd - |
3306/tcp | mysql | - - |
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Angular 14.3.0 | JavaScript frameworks |
| cdnjs | CDN |
| Google Hosted Libraries | CDN |
| Font Awesome | Font scripts |
| Google Font API | Font scripts |
| Bootstrap 5.3.0 | UI frameworks |
| Zone.js | JavaScript frameworks |
| HTTP/3 | Miscellaneous |
| Bootstrap Icons 1.4.1 | Font scripts |
| jQuery 3.7.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| LiteSpeed | Web servers |
| Lightbox | JavaScript libraries |
| OWL Carousel | JavaScript libraries |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| WOW | JavaScript frameworks, Web frameworks, JavaScript graphics |
| Hostinger | Hosting |
| jsDelivr | CDN |
| TypeScript | Programming languages |
| WhatsApp Business Chat | Live chat |
| YouTube | Video players |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-41423 | 8.7 | 0.00038 | 0.11434 | Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.21, 20.3.19, 21.2.9, and 22.0.0-next.8, a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in @angular/platform-server due to improper handling of URLs during Server-Side Rendering (SSR). When an attacker sends a request such as GET /\evil.com/ HTTP/1.1 the server engine (Express, etc.) passes the URL string to Angular’s rendering functions. Because the URL parser normalizes the backslash to a forward slash for HTTP/HTTPS schemes, the internal state of the application is hijacked to believe the current origin is evil.com. This misinterpretation tricks the application into treating the attacker’s domain as the local origin. Consequently, any relative HttpClient requests or PlatformLocation.hostname references are redirected to the attacker controlled server, potentially exposing internal APIs or metadata services. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.21, 20.3.19, 21.2.9, and 22.0.0-next.8. |
| CVE-2026-22610 | 8.5 | 0.0002 | 0.05479 | Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.18, 20.3.16, 21.0.7, and 21.1.0-rc.0, a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability has been identified in the Angular Template Compiler. The vulnerability exists because Angular’s internal sanitization schema fails to recognize the href and xlink:href attributes of SVG <script> elements as a Resource URL context. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.18, 20.3.16, 21.0.7, and 21.1.0-rc.0. |
| CVE-2025-66412 | 8.5 | 0.00023 | 0.06734 | Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to 21.0.2, 20.3.15, and 19.2.17, A Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability has been identified in the Angular Template Compiler. It occurs because the compiler's internal security schema is incomplete, allowing attackers to bypass Angular's built-in security sanitization. Specifically, the schema fails to classify certain URL-holding attributes (e.g., those that could contain javascript: URLs) as requiring strict URL security, enabling the injection of malicious scripts. This vulnerability is fixed in 21.0.2, 20.3.15, and 19.2.17. |
| CVE-2026-27970 | 7.6 | 0.00055 | 0.17207 | Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Versions prior to 21.2.0, 21.1.16, 20.3.17, and 19.2.19 have a cross-Site scripting vulnerability in the Angular internationalization (i18n) pipeline. In ICU messages (International Components for Unicode), HTML from translated content was not properly sanitized and could execute arbitrary JavaScript. Angular i18n typically involves three steps, extracting all messages from an application in the source language, sending the messages to be translated, and then merging their translations back into the final source code. Translations are frequently handled by contracts with specific partner companies, and involve sending the source messages to a separate contractor before receiving final translations for display to the end user. If the returned translations have malicious content, it could be rendered into the application and execute arbitrary JavaScript. When successfully exploited, this vulnerability allows for execution of attacker controlled JavaScript in the application origin. Depending on the nature of the application being exploited this could lead to credential exfiltration and/or page vandalism. Several preconditions apply to the attack. The attacker must compromise the translation file (xliff, xtb, etc.). Unlike most XSS vulnerabilities, this issue is not exploitable by arbitrary users. An attacker must first compromise an application's translation file before they can escalate privileges into the Angular application client. The victim application must use Angular i18n, use one or more ICU messages, render an ICU message, and not defend against XSS via a safe content security policy. Versions 21.2.0, 21.1.6, 20.3.17, and 19.2.19 patch the issue. Until the patch is applied, developers should consider reviewing and verifying translated content received from untrusted third parties before incorporating it in an Angular application, enabling strict CSP controls to block unauthorized JavaScript from executing on the page, and enabling Trusted Types to enforce proper HTML sanitization. |
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 |
|---|---|
| Angular 14.3.0 | JavaScript frameworks |
| cdnjs | CDN |
| Google Hosted Libraries | CDN |
| Font Awesome | Font scripts |
| Google Font API | Font scripts |
| Bootstrap 5.3.0 | UI frameworks |
| Zone.js | JavaScript frameworks |
| HTTP/3 | Miscellaneous |
| Bootstrap Icons 1.4.1 | Font scripts |
| jQuery 3.7.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| LiteSpeed | Web servers |
| Lightbox | JavaScript libraries |
| OWL Carousel | JavaScript libraries |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| WOW | JavaScript frameworks, Web frameworks, JavaScript graphics |
| Hostinger | Hosting |
| jsDelivr | CDN |
| TypeScript | Programming languages |
| WhatsApp Business Chat | Live chat |
| YouTube | Video players |
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://www.qlssconsulting.com/ | 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 |
Evidence
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://www.qlssconsulting.com/ | 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 | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://www.qlssconsulting.com/ | 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 | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://www.qlssconsulting.com/ | 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 | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| https://www.qlssconsulting.com/ | OPTIONS | We did a HTTP OPTIONS request. The server responded with a 200 status code and the header: `Allow: OPTIONS,HEAD,GET,POST` 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 |
Infrastructure Vulnerabilities
Evidence
We managed to detect a publicly accessible File Transfer Protocol (FTP) service. PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION 21/tcp open ftp ProFTPD or KnFTPD
Vulnerability description
We found that the File Transfer Protocol (FTP) service is publicly accessible. The FTP enables client systems to connect to upload and download files. Nonetheless, FTP lacks encryption for the data exchanged between the server and the client, leaving all transferred data exposed in plaintext.
Risk description
Exposing this service online can enable attackers to execute man-in-the-middle attacks, capturing sensitive user credentials and the contents of files because FTP operates without encryption. The entirety of the communication between the client and the server remains unsecured in plaintext. This acquired information could further facilitate additional attacks within the network.
Recommendation
We recommend turning off FTP access over the Internet and instead using a Virtual Private Network (VPN) that mandates two-factor authentication (2FA). If the FTP service is essential for business purposes, we recommend limiting access only from designated IP addresses using a firewall. Furthermore, utilizing SFTP (Secure File Transfer Protocol) is recommended as this protocol employs encryption to secure data transfers.
Evidence
We found insecure DNS cookie usage on the following nameservers: ns1.dns-parking.com, ns2.dns-parking.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
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| WOW | JavaScript frameworks, Web frameworks, JavaScript graphics |
| YouTube | Video players |
| Bootstrap 5.3.0 | UI frameworks |
| LiteSpeed | Web servers |
| Cloudflare | CDN |
| OWL Carousel | JavaScript libraries |
| Lightbox | JavaScript libraries |
| jsDelivr | CDN |
| jQuery 3.6.4 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Hosted Libraries | CDN |
| cdnjs | CDN |
| Hostinger | Hosting |
| 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
| Operating System | Accuracy |
|---|---|
| Linux 5.1 | 100% |
Vulnerability description
OS Detection
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| www.qlssconsulting.com | A | IPv4 address | 156.67.222.63 |
| www.qlssconsulting.com | NS | Name server | ns1.dns-parking.com |
| www.qlssconsulting.com | NS | Name server | ns2.dns-parking.com |
| www.qlssconsulting.com | MX | Mail server | 0 qlssconsulting-com.mail.protection.outlook.com |
| www.qlssconsulting.com | SOA | Start of Authority | ns1.dns-parking.com. dns.hostinger.com. 2026051401 10000 2400 604800 600 |
| www.qlssconsulting.com | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2a02:4780:3:1141:0:34c2:79ba:2 |
| www.qlssconsulting.com | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 include:spf.protection.outlook.com -all" |
| www.qlssconsulting.com | CNAME | Canonical name | qlssconsulting.com |
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.