Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | Raleigh, NC |
| Description: | No description found |
| IP address | 2.23.204.18 |
| Country | GB  |
| AS number | AS16625 |
| Net name | Akamai Technologies Inc |
80/tcp | http | AkamaiGHost |
443/tcp | https | AkamaiGHost |
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Google Analytics GA4 | Analytics |
| Apache HTTP Server | Web servers |
| jQuery 1.10.2 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery UI 1.10.3 | JavaScript libraries |
| PHP 8.0.30 | Programming languages |
| Widgets | |
| DigiCert | SSL/TLS certificate authorities |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| HSTS | Security |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| Risk Level | CVSS | CVE | Summary | Affected software |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6.1 | CVE-2022-31160 | jQuery UI is a curated set of user interface interactions, effects, widgets, and themes built on top of jQuery. Versions prior to 1.13.2 are potentially vulnerable to cross-site scripting. Initializing a checkboxradio widget on an input enclosed within a label makes that parent label contents considered as the input label. Calling `.checkboxradio( "refresh" )` on such a widget and the initial HTML contained encoded HTML entities will make them erroneously get decoded. This can lead to potentially executing JavaScript code. The bug has been patched in jQuery UI 1.13.2. To remediate the issue, someone who can change the initial HTML can wrap all the non-input contents of the `label` in a `span`. | jquery_ui 1.10.3 | |
| 5.3 | CVE-2024-5458 | In PHP versions 8.1.* before 8.1.29, 8.2.* before 8.2.20, 8.3.* before 8.3.8, due to a code logic error, filtering functions such as filter_var when validating URLs (FILTER_VALIDATE_URL) for certain types of URLs the function will result in invalid user information (username + password part of URLs) being treated as valid user information. This may lead to the downstream code accepting invalid URLs as valid and parsing them incorrectly. | php 8.0.30 | |
| 4.3 | CVE-2016-7103 | Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in jQuery UI before 1.12.0 might allow remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the closeText parameter of the dialog function. | jquery_ui 1.10.3 | |
| 4.3 | CVE-2021-41182 | jQuery-UI is the official jQuery user interface library. Prior to version 1.13.0, accepting the value of the `altField` option of the Datepicker widget from untrusted sources may execute untrusted code. The issue is fixed in jQuery UI 1.13.0. Any string value passed to the `altField` option is now treated as a CSS selector. A workaround is to not accept the value of the `altField` option from untrusted sources. | jquery_ui 1.10.3 | |
| 4.3 | CVE-2021-41183 | jQuery-UI is the official jQuery user interface library. Prior to version 1.13.0, accepting the value of various `*Text` options of the Datepicker widget from untrusted sources may execute untrusted code. The issue is fixed in jQuery UI 1.13.0. The values passed to various `*Text` options are now always treated as pure text, not HTML. A workaround is to not accept the value of the `*Text` options from untrusted sources. | jquery_ui 1.10.3 | |
| 4.3 | CVE-2021-41184 | jQuery-UI is the official jQuery user interface library. Prior to version 1.13.0, accepting the value of the `of` option of the `.position()` util from untrusted sources may execute untrusted code. The issue is fixed in jQuery UI 1.13.0. Any string value passed to the `of` option is now treated as a CSS selector. A workaround is to not accept the value of the `of` option from untrusted sources. | jquery_ui 1.10.3 | |
| 4.3 | CVE-2015-9251 | jQuery before 3.0.0 is vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) attacks when a cross-domain Ajax request is performed without the dataType option, causing text/javascript responses to be executed. | jquery 1.10.2 | |
| 4.3 | CVE-2019-11358 | jQuery before 3.4.0, as used in Drupal, Backdrop CMS, and other products, mishandles jQuery.extend(true, {}, ...) because of Object.prototype pollution. If an unsanitized source object contained an enumerable __proto__ property, it could extend the native Object.prototype. | jquery 1.10.2 | |
| 4.3 | CVE-2020-11023 | In jQuery versions greater than or equal to 1.0.3 and before 3.5.0, passing HTML containing <option> elements from untrusted sources - even after sanitizing it - to one of jQuery's DOM manipulation methods (i.e. .html(), .append(), and others) may execute untrusted code. This problem is patched in jQuery 3.5.0. | jquery 1.10.2 | |
| 4.3 | CVE-2020-11022 | In jQuery versions greater than or equal to 1.2 and before 3.5.0, passing HTML from untrusted sources - even after sanitizing it - to one of jQuery's DOM manipulation methods (i.e. .html(), .append(), and others) may execute untrusted code. This problem is patched in jQuery 3.5.0. | jquery 1.10.2 |
Vulnerability description
We noticed known vulnerabilities in the target application based on the server responses. They are usually related to outdated systems and expose the affected applications to the risk of unauthorized access to confidential data and possibly denial of service attacks. Depending on the system distribution the affected software can be patched but displays the same version, requiring manual checking.
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-1026 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | A9 - Using Components with Known Vulnerabilities |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 | A6 - Vulnerable and Outdated Components |
Evidence
Vulnerability description
We have noticed that the target application has overly permissive settings in its client access policy files. The <code>crossdomain.xml</code> file controls the access of externally hosted Flash scripts to this website, while <code>clientaccesspolicy.xml</code> specifies other sites that can read content from this website - which is normally denied by the Same Origin Policy. This vulnerability arises from configurations that grant excessive permissions to clients.
Recommendation
We recommend to carefully review the content of the policy file and permit access only for legitimate domains.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-16 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | A6 - Security Misconfiguration |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 | A5 - Security Misconfiguration |
Evidence
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://www.weather.gov/rah/ | Response headers include the HTTP Content-Security-Policy security header with the following security issues:`script-src: 'unsafe-eval' allows the execution of code injected into DOM APIs such as eval(). default-src: default-src should not allow '*' as source. This may enable execution of malicious JavaScript. default-src: data: URI in default-src allows the execution of unsafe scripts. script-src: ''unsafe-inline'' allows the execution of unsafe in-page scripts and event handlers. 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'. default-src: 'self' can be problematic if you host JSONP, Angular or user uploaded files. object-src: We recommend restricting object-src to 'none'.` |
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.
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 | A6 - Security Misconfiguration |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 | A5 - Security Misconfiguration |
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Google Analytics GA4 | Analytics |
| Apache HTTP Server | Web servers |
| jQuery 1.10.2 | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery UI 1.10.3 | JavaScript libraries |
| PHP 8.0.30 | Programming languages |
| Widgets | |
| DigiCert | SSL/TLS certificate authorities |
| Google Tag Manager | Tag managers |
| 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.
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
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | A6 - Security Misconfiguration |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 | A5 - Security Misconfiguration |
Vulnerability description
Website is accessible.
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.
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
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | A6 - Security Misconfiguration |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 | A5 - Security Misconfiguration |
Infrastructure Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.weather.gov | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc-reports@doc.gov,mailto:reports@dmarc.cyber.dhs.gov" |
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.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| _dmarc.weather.gov | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc-reports@doc.gov,mailto:reports@dmarc.cyber.dhs.gov" |
Vulnerability description
We found that the DMARC record for the domain is not configured with ruf tag. A missing ruf (forensic reporting) tag in a DMARC record indicates that the domain owner has not enabled the collection of detailed failure reports. Forensic reports provide valuable insights into specific instances where emails fail DMARC authentication. Without the ruf tag, the domain administrator loses the ability to receive and analyze these reports, making it difficult to investigate individual email failures or identify targeted phishing or spoofing attacks that may be exploiting weaknesses in the email authentication setup.
Recommendation
We recommend configuring the ruf tag in the DMARC record. This tag specifies where forensic reports should be sent, providing the domain owner with detailed data on DMARC validation failures. Forensic reports allow administrators to analyze why certain emails failed authentication, making it easier to fine-tune DMARC policies or address potential vulnerabilities. Ensure that the ruf email address belongs to a secure and trusted location capable of handling sensitive email data.
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| weather.gov | A | IPv4 address | 2.23.204.18 |
| weather.gov | NS | Name server | a1-97.akam.net |
| weather.gov | NS | Name server | a6-65.akam.net |
| weather.gov | NS | Name server | a7-66.akam.net |
| weather.gov | NS | Name server | a11-66.akam.net |
| weather.gov | NS | Name server | a18-67.akam.net |
| weather.gov | NS | Name server | a26-64.akam.net |
| weather.gov | SOA | Start of Authority | dns02.woc.noaa.gov. hostmaster.noaa.gov. 1560867926 1800 10800 3600 604800 |
| weather.gov | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2a02:26f0:fd00:11a5::116 |
| weather.gov | AAAA | IPv6 address | 2a02:26f0:fd00:119d::116 |
| weather.gov | TXT | Text record | "kc9b0g326re7ddnj75tublunq" |
| _dmarc.weather.gov | TXT | Text record | "v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc-reports@doc.gov,mailto:reports@dmarc.cyber.dhs.gov" |
Recommendation
We recommend reviewing all DNS records associated with the domain and identifying and removing unused or obsolete records.
Vulnerability description
OS detection couldn't determine the operating system.
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| CFML | Programming languages |
| GeoServer | Maps |
| Adobe ColdFusion | Web frameworks |
Vulnerability description
We noticed that server software and technology details are exposed, potentially aiding attackers in tailoring specific exploits against identified systems and versions.
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
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| CFML | Programming languages |
| GeoServer | Maps |
| Adobe ColdFusion | Web frameworks |
| HSTS | Security |
| DigiCert | SSL/TLS certificate authorities |
Vulnerability description
We noticed that server software and technology details are exposed, potentially aiding attackers in tailoring specific exploits against identified systems and versions.
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.