Vulnerability Scan Result

Target:

https://t.me/+v8uPDxrheTpjOTgx%20%F0%9F%94%9E%F0%9F%94%9E%F0%9F%91%80

Scanned target: https://t.me/+v8uPDxrheTpjOTgx%20%F0%9F%94%9E%F0%9F%94%9E%F0%9F%91%80

Submitted: Aug 17, 2025 from KZ

Public Scan

Scan mode: Passive (non-intrusive)

Summary

high

Info

Low

Medium

High

Critical

Screenshot

Screenshot could not be taken.

Title:	Telegram: Join Group Chat
Description:	No description found

IP Information

ip_address	149.154.167.99
country	GB
network_name	Telegram Messenger Inc
asn	AS62041

Open Ports

No open ports were found.

Web Technologies

Software / Version	Category
Bootstrap	UI frameworks
Nginx 1.18.0	Web servers, Reverse proxies
Open Graph	Miscellaneous
Paper.js	JavaScript graphics
HSTS	Security

Web Application Vulnerabilities

Evidence

CVE	CVSS	EPSS Score	EPSS Percentile	Summary
CVE-2021-23017	7.7	0.79436	0.99039	A security issue in nginx resolver was identified, which might allow an attacker who is able to forge UDP packets from the DNS server to cause 1-byte memory overwrite, resulting in worker process crash or potential other impact.
CVE-2023-44487	7.5	0.94504	0.99999	The HTTP/2 protocol allows a denial of service (server resource consumption) because request cancellation can reset many streams quickly, as exploited in the wild in August through October 2023.
CVE-2021-3618	7.4	0.00384	0.58877	ALPACA is an application layer protocol content confusion attack, exploiting TLS servers implementing different protocols but using compatible certificates, such as multi-domain or wildcard certificates. A MiTM attacker having access to victim's traffic at the TCP/IP layer can redirect traffic from one subdomain to another, resulting in a valid TLS session. This breaks the authentication of TLS and cross-protocol attacks may be possible where the behavior of one protocol service may compromise the other at the application layer.
CVE-2022-41742	7.1	0.00074	0.22893	NGINX Open Source before versions 1.23.2 and 1.22.1, NGINX Open Source Subscription before versions R2 P1 and R1 P1, and NGINX Plus before versions R27 P1 and R26 P1 have a vulnerability in the module ngx_http_mp4_module that might allow a local attacker to cause a worker process crash, or might result in worker process memory disclosure by using a specially crafted audio or video file. The issue affects only NGINX products that are built with the module ngx_http_mp4_module, when the mp4 directive is used in the configuration file. Further, the attack is possible only if an attacker can trigger processing of a specially crafted audio or video file with the module ngx_http_mp4_module.
CVE-2022-41741	7	0.00874	0.74307	NGINX Open Source before versions 1.23.2 and 1.22.1, NGINX Open Source Subscription before versions R2 P1 and R1 P1, and NGINX Plus before versions R27 P1 and R26 P1 have a vulnerability in the module ngx_http_mp4_module that might allow a local attacker to corrupt NGINX worker memory, resulting in its termination or potential other impact using a specially crafted audio or video file. The issue affects only NGINX products that are built with the ngx_http_mp4_module, when the mp4 directive is used in the configuration file. Further, the attack is possible only if an attacker can trigger processing of a specially crafted audio or video file with the module ngx_http_mp4_module.

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
Bootstrap	UI frameworks
Nginx 1.18.0	Web servers, Reverse proxies
Open Graph	Miscellaneous
Paper.js	JavaScript graphics
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.

Evidence

URL	Evidence
https://t.me/+v8uPDxrheTpjOTgx 🔞🔞👀	Response headers do not include the Referrer-Policy HTTP security header as well as the `<meta/>` tag with name 'referrer' is not present in the response.

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

URL	Evidence
https://t.me/+v8uPDxrheTpjOTgx 🔞🔞👀	Response headers include the HTTP Content-Security-Policy security header with the following security issues:frame-ancestors: This directive tells the browser whether you want to allow your site to be framed or not. By preventing a browser from framing your site you can defend against attacks like clickjacking. The recommended value is 'none' or 'self'. base-uri: Missing base-uri allows the injection of base tags. They can be used to set the base URL for all relative (script) URLs to an attacker controlled domain. We recommend setting it to 'none' or 'self'. object-src: Missing object-src allows the injection of plugins which can execute JavaScript. We recommend setting it to 'none'. default-src: The default-src directive should be set as a fall-back when other restrictions have not been specified. script-src: script-src directive is missing.

https://t.me/+v8uPDxrheTpjOTgx 🔞🔞👀

Response headers include the HTTP Content-Security-Policy security header with the following security issues:frame-ancestors: This directive tells the browser whether you want to allow your site to be framed or not. By preventing a browser from framing your site you can defend against attacks like clickjacking. The recommended value is 'none' or 'self'. base-uri: Missing base-uri allows the injection of base tags. They can be used to set the base URL for all relative (script) URLs to an attacker controlled domain. We recommend setting it to 'none' or 'self'. object-src: Missing object-src allows the injection of plugins which can execute JavaScript. We recommend setting it to 'none'. default-src: The default-src directive should be set as a fall-back when other restrictions have not been specified. script-src: script-src directive is missing.

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-693
OWASP Top 10 - 2017
OWASP Top 10 - 2021

Evidence

URL	Evidence
https://t.me/+v8uPDxrheTpjOTgx 🔞🔞👀	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

Infrastructure Vulnerabilities

Evidence

Domain Queried	DNS Record Type	Description	Value
t.me	A	IPv4 address	149.154.167.99
t.me	NS	Name server	ns-cloud-b2.googledomains.com
t.me	NS	Name server	ns-cloud-b4.googledomains.com
t.me	NS	Name server	ns-cloud-b3.googledomains.com
t.me	NS	Name server	ns-cloud-b1.googledomains.com
t.me	SOA	Start of Authority	ns-cloud-b1.googledomains.com. dns.jomax.net.t.me. 2017053102 28800 7200 604800 600
t.me	AAAA	IPv6 address	2001:67c:4e8:f004::9
t.me	SPF	Sender Policy Framework	"v=spf1 -all"
_dmarc.t.me	TXT	Text record	"v=DMARC1;p=reject;sp=reject;adkim=s;aspf=s"

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.