Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | Rocketplay casino Australia - 2458rocketplay-promo-code - Gitea: Git with a cup of tea |
| Description: | 2458rocketplay-promo-code |
| ip_address | 43.155.145.57 |
| country | KR  |
| network_name | Tencent |
| asn | AS132203 |
22/tcp | ssh | OpenSSH 9.6p1 Ubuntu 3ubuntu13.4 |
80/tcp | http | OpenResty web app server - |
88/tcp | kerberos-sec | - - |
443/tcp | https | openresty - |
7000/tcp | afs3-fileserver | - - |
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Gitea | Development |
| Gnuboard | CMS |
| Go | Programming languages |
| jQuery 3.7.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| MySQL | Databases |
| Nginx | Web servers, Reverse proxies |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| OpenResty | Web servers |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| PWA | Miscellaneous |
| Webpack | Miscellaneous |
| RSS | Miscellaneous |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://gitea.wgqcd.com/joleneslim4544/2458rocketplay-promo-code/wiki/Rocketplay-casino-Australia | 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://gitea.wgqcd.com/joleneslim4544/2458rocketplay-promo-code/wiki/Rocketplay-casino-Australia | 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 | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://gitea.wgqcd.com/joleneslim4544/2458rocketplay-promo-code/wiki/Rocketplay-casino-Australia | 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
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Gitea | Development |
| Gnuboard | CMS |
| Go | Programming languages |
| jQuery 3.7.1 | JavaScript libraries |
| MySQL | Databases |
| Nginx | Web servers, Reverse proxies |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| OpenResty | Web servers |
| PHP | Programming languages |
| PWA | Miscellaneous |
| Webpack | Miscellaneous |
| 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.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-200 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 |
Evidence
| URL | Method | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| https://gitea.wgqcd.com/joleneslim4544/2458rocketplay-promo-code/wiki/Rocketplay-casino-Australia | OPTIONS | We did a HTTP OPTIONS request. The server responded with a 405 status code and the header: `Allow: 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 SSH service. Starting Nmap ( https://nmap.org ) at 2026-05-16 07:56 EEST Nmap scan report for gitea.wgqcd.com (43.155.145.57) Host is up (0.27s latency).
PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION 22/tcp open ssh OpenSSH 9.6p1 Ubuntu 3ubuntu13.4 (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 3.90 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
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Gitea | Development |
| Go | Programming languages |
| Nginx | Web servers, Reverse proxies |
| OpenResty | 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
| Operating System | Accuracy |
|---|---|
| Windows | 100% |
Vulnerability description
OS Detection
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| gitea.wgqcd.com | A | IPv4 address | 43.155.145.57 |
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.