Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | Keplr Vision |
| Description: | At Keplr Vision, we’re dedicated to supporting independent optometry practices nationwide with non-clinical administrative services, allowing optometrists to focus on what matters most: providing exceptional patient care. Led by optometrists at every level, we bring a patient-centered approach to everything we do. |
| ip_address | 104.207.254.237 |
| country | US  |
| network_name | Liquid Web, L.L.C. |
| asn | AS36444 |
21/tcp | ftp | ProFTPD - |
22/tcp | ssh | OpenSSH 7.4 |
25/tcp | smtp | qmail smtpd - |
80/tcp | http | nginx - |
443/tcp | https | nginx - |
587/tcp | submission | - - |
990/tcp | ftp | ProFTPD - |
993/tcp | imaps | - - |
995/tcp | pop3s | - - |
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| AccessiBe | Accessibility |
| All in One SEO Pack | SEO, WordPress plugins |
| Akismet | WordPress plugins |
| Linkedin Insight Tag | Analytics |
| Elementor 3.35.7 | Page builders, WordPress plugins |
| Font Awesome | Font scripts |
| jQuery Migrate 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| core-js 3.46.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Font API | Font scripts |
| Gravity Forms 2.9.30 | WordPress plugins, Form builders |
| jQuery 3.7.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery UI 1.13.3 | JavaScript libraries |
| lit-element 4.1.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Maps | Maps |
| MySQL | Databases |
| Nginx | Web servers, Reverse proxies |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| OWL Carousel | JavaScript libraries |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Priority Hints | Performance |
| WordPress 6.9.4 | CMS, Blogs |
| Fastbase | Analytics |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| RSS | Miscellaneous |
| Genesis theme | WordPress themes |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://keplrvision.com/ | 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
Vulnerability description
We found the robots.txt on the target server. This file instructs web crawlers what URLs and endpoints of the web application they can visit and crawl. Website administrators often misuse this file while attempting to hide some web pages from the users.
Risk description
There is no particular security risk in having a robots.txt file. However, it's important to note that adding endpoints in it should not be considered a security measure, as this file can be directly accessed and read by anyone.
Recommendation
We recommend you to manually review the entries from robots.txt and remove the ones which lead to sensitive locations in the website (ex. administration panels, configuration files, etc).
Evidence
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://keplrvision.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://keplrvision.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 | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://keplrvision.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
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| AccessiBe | Accessibility |
| All in One SEO Pack | SEO, WordPress plugins |
| Akismet | WordPress plugins |
| Linkedin Insight Tag | Analytics |
| Elementor 3.35.7 | Page builders, WordPress plugins |
| Font Awesome | Font scripts |
| jQuery Migrate 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| core-js 3.46.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Font API | Font scripts |
| Gravity Forms 2.9.30 | WordPress plugins, Form builders |
| jQuery 3.7.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery UI 1.13.3 | JavaScript libraries |
| lit-element 4.1.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Maps | Maps |
| MySQL | Databases |
| Nginx | Web servers, Reverse proxies |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| OWL Carousel | JavaScript libraries |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Priority Hints | Performance |
| WordPress 6.9.4 | CMS, Blogs |
| Fastbase | Analytics |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| RSS | Miscellaneous |
| Genesis theme | WordPress themes |
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 | Method | Parameters | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| https://keplrvision.com/ | 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: COPE@keplrvision.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 |
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 |
Evidence
| URL | Method | Parameters | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| https://keplrvision.com/wp-json/oembed/1.0/embed | GET | Query: url=https://keplrvision.com/ 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 | Possible API endpoint found at |
Vulnerability description
We found API endpoints while crawling the given web application.
Risk description
These endpoints may represent an attack surface for malicious actors interested in API-specific vulnerabilities.
Recommendation
Use the API Scanner to perform a more thorough vulnerability check for these endpoints, if an API specification is present.
Infrastructure Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS Score | EPSS Percentile | CISA KEV | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2023-38408 | 9.8 | 0.69186 | 0.9862 | No | The PKCS#11 feature in ssh-agent in OpenSSH before 9.3p2 has an insufficiently trustworthy search path, leading to remote code execution if an agent is forwarded to an attacker-controlled system. (Code in /usr/lib is not necessarily safe for loading into ssh-agent.) NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2016-10009. |
| CVE-2020-15778 | 7.4 | 0.61479 | 0.98304 | No | scp in OpenSSH through 8.3p1 allows command injection in the scp.c toremote function, as demonstrated by backtick characters in the destination argument. NOTE: the vendor reportedly has stated that they intentionally omit validation of "anomalous argument transfers" because that could "stand a great chance of breaking existing workflows." |
| CVE-2021-41617 | 7 | 0.00274 | 0.50579 | No | sshd in OpenSSH 6.2 through 8.x before 8.8, when certain non-default configurations are used, allows privilege escalation because supplemental groups are not initialized as expected. Helper programs for AuthorizedKeysCommand and AuthorizedPrincipalsCommand may run with privileges associated with group memberships of the sshd process, if the configuration specifies running the command as a different user. |
| CVE-2025-26465 | 6.8 | 0.59965 | 0.9824 | No | A vulnerability was found in OpenSSH when the VerifyHostKeyDNS option is enabled. A machine-in-the-middle attack can be performed by a malicious machine impersonating a legit server. This issue occurs due to how OpenSSH mishandles error codes in specific conditions when verifying the host key. For an attack to be considered successful, the attacker needs to manage to exhaust the client's memory resource first, turning the attack complexity high. |
| CVE-2019-6110 | 6.8 | 0.51287 | 0.97849 | No | In OpenSSH 7.9, due to accepting and displaying arbitrary stderr output from the server, a malicious server (or Man-in-The-Middle attacker) can manipulate the client output, for example to use ANSI control codes to hide additional files being transferred. |
Vulnerability description
Vulnerabilities found for Openssh 7.4
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 2026-03-22 11:28 EET Nmap scan report for keplrvision.com (104.207.254.237) Host is up (0.091s latency). rDNS record for 104.207.254.237: cloudhost-2290789.us-midwest-1.nxcli.net
PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION 22/tcp open ssh OpenSSH 7.4 (protocol 2.0) | ssh-auth-methods: | Supported authentication methods: | publickey | password |_ keyboard-interactive
Service detection performed. Please report any incorrect results at https://nmap.org/submit/ . Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 1.85 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 File Transfer Protocol (FTP) service. PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION 21/tcp open ftp ProFTPD
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
| DKIM selector | Key type | Key size | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| rsa | 1296 | "k=rsa;p=MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDeMVIzrCa3T14JsNY0IRv5/2V1/v2itlviLQBwXsa7shBD6TrBkswsFUToPyMRWC9tbR/5ey0nRBH0ZVxp+lsmTxid2Y2z+FApQ6ra2VsXfbJP3HE6wAO0YTVEJt1TmeczhEd2Jiz/fcabIISgXEdSpTYJhb0ct0VJRxcg4c8c7wIDAQAB" |
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
We managed to detect a publicly accessible File Transfer Protocol (FTP) service. PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION 990/tcp open ftp ProFTPD
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
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.keplrvision.com | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:dmarc-aggregrate@keplrvision.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc-aggregrate@keplrvision.com;" |
Vulnerability description
We found that the target uses p=quarantine in the DMARC policy. When a DMARC policy is set to p=quarantine, emails that fail DMARC validation are delivered but placed in the recipient’s spam or junk folder. Although it offers some protection, this policy is less strict than p=reject, which blocks such emails entirely.
Risk description
While emails failing DMARC validation are sent to the spam folder, users may still retrieve them from there, leading to a higher risk of phishing and spoofing attacks succeeding. Moreover, less strict enforcement may allow more fraudulent emails to reach user inboxes if misclassified.
Recommendation
We recommend considering moving to a stricter policy, such as p=reject, where emails that fail DMARC validation are completely rejected rather than delivered to spam folders. This reduces the risk of users interacting with potentially malicious emails.
Evidence
We found insecure DNS cookie usage on the following nameservers: ns03.domaincontrol.com, ns04.domaincontrol.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
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.keplrvision.com | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:dmarc-aggregrate@keplrvision.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc-aggregrate@keplrvision.com;" |
Vulnerability description
We found that the DMARC record for the domain is not configured with sp policy, meaning that no policy is enforced for subdomains. When a DMARC record does not include a subdomain policy (sp directive), subdomains are not explicitly covered by the main domain's DMARC policy. This means that emails sent from subdomains (e.g., sub.example.com) may not be subject to the same DMARC enforcement as the main domain (example.com). As a result, attackers could potentially spoof emails from subdomains without being blocked or flagged, even if the main domain has a strict DMARC policy.
Risk description
Without a subdomain policy (sp directive) in the DMARC record, subdomains are not protected by the same DMARC enforcement as the main domain, leaving them vulnerable to spoofing attacks. This inconsistency can be exploited by attackers to send phishing emails from subdomains, undermining the organization’s overall email security.
Recommendation
To mitigate the risk, we recommend configuring the DMARC record with a subdomain policy by adding the sp=reject or sp=quarantine directive. This will extend DMARC enforcement to all subdomains, preventing spoofing attempts and maintaining consistent security across both the main domain and its subdomains.
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| keplrvision.com | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 include:spf.protection.outlook.com include:spf.sendinblue.com -all" |
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| keplrvision.com | A | IPv4 address | 104.207.254.237 |
| keplrvision.com | NS | Name server | ns03.domaincontrol.com |
| keplrvision.com | NS | Name server | ns04.domaincontrol.com |
| keplrvision.com | MX | Mail server | 0 keplrvision-com.mail.protection.outlook.com |
| keplrvision.com | SOA | Start of Authority | ns03.domaincontrol.com. dns.jomax.net. 2026012700 28800 7200 604800 600 |
| keplrvision.com | TXT | Text record | "ZOOM_verify_eZADoNxjQrKDUTGwOS8BtQ" |
| keplrvision.com | TXT | Text record | "ms-domain-verification=70a8eb36-a646-491a-95ff-247a9b78e531" |
| keplrvision.com | TXT | Text record | "solutionreach-domain-verification=qVc8eJYO5oe1p4LEzgnSbwikPj170k" |
| keplrvision.com | TXT | Text record | "apple-domain-verification=xMMgEYGXHcBIYyNA" |
| keplrvision.com | TXT | Text record | "Sendinblue-code:358a7b290ae99611d4bb3b8d6fd7f649" |
| keplrvision.com | TXT | Text record | "facebook-domain-verification=2z4yyeh9ht64ztheldr4ubw2numxnv" |
| keplrvision.com | TXT | Text record | "google-site-verification=HK-qdNrZk0OpIX6vIabHIWyKvUY1XzSA17nmVzujS9k" |
| keplrvision.com | TXT | Text record | "DD76582E08" |
| keplrvision.com | SPF | Sender Policy Framework | "v=spf1 include:spf.protection.outlook.com include:spf.sendinblue.com -all" |
| _dmarc.keplrvision.com | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:dmarc-aggregrate@keplrvision.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc-aggregrate@keplrvision.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.
Evidence
| Operating System | Accuracy |
|---|---|
| Crestron XPanel control system | 90% |
Vulnerability description
OS Detection
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| WordPress 6.9.4 | CMS, Blogs |
| MySQL | Databases |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| Google Maps | Maps |
| Gravity Forms 2.9.30 | WordPress plugins, Form builders |
| Nginx | Web servers, Reverse proxies |
| Genesis theme | WordPress themes |
| Akismet | WordPress plugins |
| Ultimate Addons for Elementor 1.44.1 | WordPress plugins |
| Elementor 3.35.7 | Page builders, WordPress plugins |
| All in One SEO Pack | SEO, WordPress plugins |
| OWL Carousel | JavaScript libraries |
| Fastbase | Analytics |
| Twitter Emoji (Twemoji) | Font scripts |
| lit-html 3.2.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| lit-element 4.1.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Linkedin Insight Tag | Analytics |
| jQuery UI 1.13.3 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery Migrate 3.4.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery 3.7.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| core-js 3.46.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| AccessiBe | Accessibility |
| Google Font API | Font scripts |
| Font Awesome | Font scripts |
| RSS | 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
| DKIM selector | Key type | Key size | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| rsa | 1296 | "k=rsa;p=MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDeMVIzrCa3T14JsNY0IRv5/2V1/v2itlviLQBwXsa7shBD6TrBkswsFUToPyMRWC9tbR/5ey0nRBH0ZVxp+lsmTxid2Y2z+FApQ6ra2VsXfbJP3HE6wAO0YTVEJt1TmeczhEd2Jiz/fcabIISgXEdSpTYJhb0ct0VJRxcg4c8c7wIDAQAB" | |
| selector1 | rsa | 1422 | "v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAxY3qnFyaDGv+ggVzCS+3Jf1L3HVVj11JH+3wFLqGF7ivXrYacV7TC9rGspR1cuEkNT4gJkXbYpIb6r81MBGSQZjPoNvgzujLdwEXmFMHOnnNiEWcLVw6r8lwHuDb0XHERpPnAd+6p+oVT589tx06xC76eLF8h6RTX/BOXUNxbKIBpGmgMvPITODbmJMoW9mjv" "qiKgPQcIqT7ps4ZK/dfDTWU5Xd5tKkv7+P5eoj/oO6/1dkxfjum/Y/EmdZYdpy5h118Xb5AMQWR3/e7kykF0oTWyTh+ei9I30SZUv8aLOkQiMVaGv9ico79TtqX7jYQ8qWBV4i9Bq7csPK1ItleaQIDAQAB;" |
| selector2 | rsa | 1422 | "v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAu+DPM1ay9By1UeHfE3cFHg7/g+GXkOVBUh34ay7N4sjKgTF3EsBz0P6jGvv1+oPmc8UVJfRV/mEewQmZvapRrpKdKcuFkvbJI7n2VguMmXww4K/t1gyyCWQVc84yxF66Eg2GVUedJOOU1j1RTjt3sczF4pUiqt/oW2Y2R7Dk6l0zqLc7plNevvBrMcsUl0fyB" "aMcOPJQfyA9ogmThwu7jw3N/z0Rq4vMcC673PbTnJ2qMQeyaj+LaQNnh2dSQvs9rJtOHFb1POOQMOtTkXEJVxtY3cFkBLHnHo1qTQxHX541OsOS6BAcBJCnOuiV+8Ec0womsl2EaRheL+q7p4bPtQIDAQAB;" |