Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | ClassLink | Identity & Access Management for Education |
| Description: | ClassLink is a provider of identity and access management products offering instant access to apps and files with SSO, class rostering, account provisioning, and analytics. |
| ip_address | 51.195.20.145 |
| country | FR  |
| network_name | Ovh Sas |
| asn | AS16276 |
22/tcp | ssh | OpenSSH 9.6p1 Ubuntu 3ubuntu13.16 |
80/tcp | http | Caddy httpd - |
443/tcp | https | - - |
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Caddy | Web servers |
| Google Hosted Libraries | CDN |
| Adobe Fonts 1.21.0 | Font scripts |
| Google Font API | Font scripts |
| core-js 3.19.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| Go | Programming languages |
| jQuery 3.5.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| MySQL | Databases |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| DoubleClick Floodlight | Advertising |
| Typekit 1.21.0 | Font scripts |
| Webflow 1.6.0 | Page builders |
| WordPress | CMS, Blogs |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Jetboost | Widgets |
| jsDelivr | CDN |
| Leadfeeder | Analytics |
| Weglot | Translation |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| URL | Response URL | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| http://whm.whm.whm.wccheck-1ba6e26d-b.whm.jabber.nike-math.duckdns.org/ | http://whm.whm.whm.wccheck-1ba6e26d-b.whm.jabber.nike-math.duckdns.org/ | 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-319 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| http://whm.whm.whm.wccheck-1ba6e26d-b.whm.jabber.nike-math.duckdns.org/ | 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 |
|---|---|
| http://whm.whm.whm.wccheck-1ba6e26d-b.whm.jabber.nike-math.duckdns.org/ | 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://whm.whm.whm.wccheck-1ba6e26d-b.whm.jabber.nike-math.duckdns.org/ | 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-1021 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| URL | Method | Parameters | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| http://whm.whm.whm.wccheck-1ba6e26d-b.whm.jabber.nike-math.duckdns.org/ | 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
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Caddy | Web servers |
| Google Hosted Libraries | CDN |
| Adobe Fonts 1.21.0 | Font scripts |
| Google Font API | Font scripts |
| core-js 3.19.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| Go | Programming languages |
| jQuery 3.5.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| MySQL | Databases |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| DoubleClick Floodlight | Advertising |
| Typekit 1.21.0 | Font scripts |
| Webflow 1.6.0 | Page builders |
| WordPress | CMS, Blogs |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Jetboost | Widgets |
| jsDelivr | CDN |
| Leadfeeder | Analytics |
| Weglot | Translation |
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 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.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-1188 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Infrastructure Vulnerabilities
Evidence
We managed to detect a publicly accessible SSH service. Starting Nmap ( https://nmap.org ) at 2026-05-15 00:06 EEST Nmap scan report for whm.whm.whm.wccheck-1ba6e26d-b.whm.jabber.nike-math.duckdns.org (51.195.20.145) Host is up (0.0019s latency). rDNS record for 51.195.20.145: vps-11206beb.vps.ovh.net
PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION 22/tcp open ssh OpenSSH 9.6p1 Ubuntu 3ubuntu13.16 (Ubuntu Linux; 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 0.80 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
| Operating System | Accuracy |
|---|---|
| Linux 5.0 - 5.4 | 100% |
Vulnerability description
OS Detection
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| whm.whm.whm.wccheck-1ba6e26d-b.whm.jabber.nike-math.duckdns.org | A | IPv4 address | 51.195.20.145 |
| whm.whm.whm.wccheck-1ba6e26d-b.whm.jabber.nike-math.duckdns.org | MX | Mail server | 50 whm.whm.whm.wccheck-1ba6e26d-b.whm.jabber.nike-math.duckdns.org |
| whm.whm.whm.wccheck-1ba6e26d-b.whm.jabber.nike-math.duckdns.org | TXT | Text record | "" |
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 |
|---|---|
| WordPress | CMS, Blogs |
| MySQL | Databases |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Go | Programming languages |
| Caddy | Web servers |
| Weglot | Translation |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| jsDelivr | CDN |
| jQuery 3.5.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| Google Hosted Libraries | CDN |
| Google Font API | Font scripts |
| DoubleClick Floodlight | Advertising |
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.