Vulnerability Scan Result
| Title: | St. Jude Children's Research Hospital |
| Description: | A leading children’s hospital, St. Jude treats the toughest childhood cancers and pediatric diseases. Learn about patient referrals, and donate so families never receive a bill for treatment, travel, housing or food. |
| IP address | 104.78.162.37 |
| Country | GB  |
| AS number | AS16625 |
| Net name | Akamai Technologies Inc |
80/tcp | http | AkamaiGHost |
443/tcp | https | AkamaiGHost |
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| AdRoll | Advertising, Retargeting |
| Akamai | CDN |
| Boomerang | JavaScript libraries, RUM |
| Adobe Experience Platform Identity Service | Customer data platform |
| Adobe Experience Platform Launch | Tag managers |
| LazySizes | JavaScript libraries, Performance |
| jQuery Migrate 3.3.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| Apache HTTP Server 2.4.37 | Web servers |
| Java | Programming languages |
| jQuery | JavaScript libraries |
| Modernizr | JavaScript libraries |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| OpenSSL 1.1.1k | Web server extensions |
| Adobe Analytics | Analytics |
| Adobe Experience Manager | CMS |
| Adobe Target 2.10.0 | A/B Testing, Personalisation |
| Akamai Bot Manager | Security |
| Brightcove | Video players |
| Classy | Fundraising & donations |
| DigiCert | SSL/TLS certificate authorities |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| OneTrust | Cookie compliance |
| Red Hat | Operating systems |
| HSTS | Security |
Web Application Vulnerabilities
Evidence
| Risk Level | CVSS | CVE | Summary | Affected software |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | CVE-2022-1292 | The c_rehash script does not properly sanitise shell metacharacters to prevent command injection. This script is distributed by some operating systems in a manner where it is automatically executed. On such operating systems, an attacker could execute arbitrary commands with the privileges of the script. Use of the c_rehash script is considered obsolete and should be replaced by the OpenSSL rehash command line tool. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.3 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1,3.0.2). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1o (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1n). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2ze (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2zd). | openssl 1.1.1k | |
| 10 | CVE-2022-2068 | In addition to the c_rehash shell command injection identified in CVE-2022-1292, further circumstances where the c_rehash script does not properly sanitise shell metacharacters to prevent command injection were found by code review. When the CVE-2022-1292 was fixed it was not discovered that there are other places in the script where the file names of certificates being hashed were possibly passed to a command executed through the shell. This script is distributed by some operating systems in a manner where it is automatically executed. On such operating systems, an attacker could execute arbitrary commands with the privileges of the script. Use of the c_rehash script is considered obsolete and should be replaced by the OpenSSL rehash command line tool. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.4 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1,3.0.2,3.0.3). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1p (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1o). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2zf (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2ze). | openssl 1.1.1k | |
| 9.8 | CVE-2023-25690 | Some mod_proxy configurations on Apache HTTP Server versions 2.4.0 through 2.4.55 allow a HTTP Request Smuggling attack. Configurations are affected when mod_proxy is enabled along with some form of RewriteRule or ProxyPassMatch in which a non-specific pattern matches some portion of the user-supplied request-target (URL) data and is then re-inserted into the proxied request-target using variable substitution. For example, something like: RewriteEngine on RewriteRule "^/here/(.*)" "http://example.com:8080/elsewhere?$1"; [P] ProxyPassReverse /here/ http://example.com:8080/ Request splitting/smuggling could result in bypass of access controls in the proxy server, proxying unintended URLs to existing origin servers, and cache poisoning. Users are recommended to update to at least version 2.4.56 of Apache HTTP Server. | http_server 2.4.37 | |
| 9.8 | CVE-2024-38474 | Substitution encoding issue in mod_rewrite in Apache HTTP Server 2.4.59 and earlier allows attacker to execute scripts in directories permitted by the configuration but not directly reachable by any URL or source disclosure of scripts meant to only to be executed as CGI. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 2.4.60, which fixes this issue. Some RewriteRules that capture and substitute unsafely will now fail unless rewrite flag "UnsafeAllow3F" is specified. | http_server 2.4.37 | |
| 9.8 | CVE-2024-38476 | Vulnerability in core of Apache HTTP Server 2.4.59 and earlier are vulnerably to information disclosure, SSRF or local script execution via backend applications whose response headers are malicious or exploitable. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 2.4.60, which fixes this issue. | http_server 2.4.37 | |
| 9 | CVE-2022-36760 | Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request Smuggling') vulnerability in mod_proxy_ajp of Apache HTTP Server allows an attacker to smuggle requests to the AJP server it forwards requests to. This issue affects Apache HTTP Server Apache HTTP Server 2.4 version 2.4.54 and prior versions. | http_server 2.4.37 | |
| 7.8 | CVE-2023-4807 | Issue summary: The POLY1305 MAC (message authentication code) implementation contains a bug that might corrupt the internal state of applications on the Windows 64 platform when running on newer X86_64 processors supporting the AVX512-IFMA instructions. Impact summary: If in an application that uses the OpenSSL library an attacker can influence whether the POLY1305 MAC algorithm is used, the application state might be corrupted with various application dependent consequences. The POLY1305 MAC (message authentication code) implementation in OpenSSL does not save the contents of non-volatile XMM registers on Windows 64 platform when calculating the MAC of data larger than 64 bytes. Before returning to the caller all the XMM registers are set to zero rather than restoring their previous content. The vulnerable code is used only on newer x86_64 processors supporting the AVX512-IFMA instructions. The consequences of this kind of internal application state corruption can be various - from no consequences, if the calling application does not depend on the contents of non-volatile XMM registers at all, to the worst consequences, where the attacker could get complete control of the application process. However given the contents of the registers are just zeroized so the attacker cannot put arbitrary values inside, the most likely consequence, if any, would be an incorrect result of some application dependent calculations or a crash leading to a denial of service. The POLY1305 MAC algorithm is most frequently used as part of the CHACHA20-POLY1305 AEAD (authenticated encryption with associated data) algorithm. The most common usage of this AEAD cipher is with TLS protocol versions 1.2 and 1.3 and a malicious client can influence whether this AEAD cipher is used by the server. This implies that server applications using OpenSSL can be potentially impacted. However we are currently not aware of any concrete application that would be affected by this issue therefore we consider this a Low severity security issue. As a workaround the AVX512-IFMA instructions support can be disabled at runtime by setting the environment variable OPENSSL_ia32cap: OPENSSL_ia32cap=:~0x200000 The FIPS provider is not affected by this issue. | openssl 1.1.1k | |
| 7.8 | CVE-2019-9517 | Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to unconstrained interal data buffering, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker opens the HTTP/2 window so the peer can send without constraint; however, they leave the TCP window closed so the peer cannot actually write (many of) the bytes on the wire. The attacker then sends a stream of requests for a large response object. Depending on how the servers queue the responses, this can consume excess memory, CPU, or both. | http_server 2.4.37 | |
| 7.5 | CVE-2021-3711 | In order to decrypt SM2 encrypted data an application is expected to call the API function EVP_PKEY_decrypt(). Typically an application will call this function twice. The first time, on entry, the "out" parameter can be NULL and, on exit, the "outlen" parameter is populated with the buffer size required to hold the decrypted plaintext. The application can then allocate a sufficiently sized buffer and call EVP_PKEY_decrypt() again, but this time passing a non-NULL value for the "out" parameter. A bug in the implementation of the SM2 decryption code means that the calculation of the buffer size required to hold the plaintext returned by the first call to EVP_PKEY_decrypt() can be smaller than the actual size required by the second call. This can lead to a buffer overflow when EVP_PKEY_decrypt() is called by the application a second time with a buffer that is too small. A malicious attacker who is able present SM2 content for decryption to an application could cause attacker chosen data to overflow the buffer by up to a maximum of 62 bytes altering the contents of other data held after the buffer, possibly changing application behaviour or causing the application to crash. The location of the buffer is application dependent but is typically heap allocated. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1l (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1k). | openssl 1.1.1k | |
| 7.5 | CVE-2022-4450 | The function PEM_read_bio_ex() reads a PEM file from a BIO and parses and decodes the "name" (e.g. "CERTIFICATE"), any header data and the payload data. If the function succeeds then the "name_out", "header" and "data" arguments are populated with pointers to buffers containing the relevant decoded data. The caller is responsible for freeing those buffers. It is possible to construct a PEM file that results in 0 bytes of payload data. In this case PEM_read_bio_ex() will return a failure code but will populate the header argument with a pointer to a buffer that has already been freed. If the caller also frees this buffer then a double free will occur. This will most likely lead to a crash. This could be exploited by an attacker who has the ability to supply malicious PEM files for parsing to achieve a denial of service attack. The functions PEM_read_bio() and PEM_read() are simple wrappers around PEM_read_bio_ex() and therefore these functions are also directly affected. These functions are also called indirectly by a number of other OpenSSL functions including PEM_X509_INFO_read_bio_ex() and SSL_CTX_use_serverinfo_file() which are also vulnerable. Some OpenSSL internal uses of these functions are not vulnerable because the caller does not free the header argument if PEM_read_bio_ex() returns a failure code. These locations include the PEM_read_bio_TYPE() functions as well as the decoders introduced in OpenSSL 3.0. The OpenSSL asn1parse command line application is also impacted by this issue. | openssl 1.1.1k |
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
| URL | Cookie Name | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| https://www.stjude.org/ | StJudeSite, _abck, bm_sz, sjedge | The server responded with Set-Cookie header(s) that does not specify the HttpOnly flag: Set-Cookie: StJudeSite=MEM Set-Cookie: _abck=8CAFCA3B958B67AE906A1FD7AE0AF033~-1~YAAQMO1lX5B/v16UAQAArefPYQ1qa+4gICQ9uem2akegxp/HOiLPnlc8eOgG0wrr8OQWY2K8aKzAKfoMGjETuIT1p5PUyTCiToTG0x5LtW7zF3OyiVWQ6p1uZEisdB5u3Wg+d25pIDQ6TdhjCSqStczKFmj9t3+1/vZBuTq7KL2MGjBI/Ab2AXZ1xwZGhHKSuS5EUcE1f+p6frz+MK6tBs8pIEHLlcR7V7jGQEyRXQX9O2jaBvEMAgkuW4I1mgoGoQFH92hFzYUl+V1Jg15r6lvB56/B0a6aUwtfYI8NJgUW+bUeG8NFApRlEZKojTZYsBY/saP0T2eQILtHcf/00WPENvXJaCv4aW/J4TxAkSSrhNG9WlJO0LIzoVT6NGh3SG/PPrZKneYi8tqLIhRL0Pr2mdrNxcJiqX7a4zU=~-1~-1~-1 Set-Cookie: bm_sz=E1B20DE42304C1BAFF3DDD4E12B01220~YAAQMO1lX5F/v16UAQAArefPYRr9qegkOuyHGpVVcqhoKffkkPeCqeK/axMrdM+eYTx4Yi7Q4cnDcJDfXO0pbWgAok9ekfwyJy/dfOKFnQWbMiG2KAfvlH0wcK3Mq4D2IUIfRdRYJJIBumDSiV76NGcSFkljD252D4Rpayk1+QQDYA2hJtO1M1nOfjCxV7VYvjBXY53Bp7TBcdKai/S1fj9JUlJlsM1bmWtyiTFvmw/PPW8B52Ez+DXYkSEHyRCMPyL5BhjolRXLbL9UWvDAESfRGvKvJuLA6TOfpt3RLcbtPQEasLOdbLvic1yD7W9MAYUqwOdjKvy+16zNRTplIwsdpXmOAW/PYyU0qBM=~4601414~4605240 Set-Cookie: sjedge=tci=88.80.191.195,cc=GB,bw=vhigh,cst=EN |
Vulnerability description
We found that a cookie has been set without the <code>HttpOnly</code> flag, which means it can be accessed by potentially malicious JavaScript code running inside the web page. The root cause for this usually revolves around misconfigurations in the code or server settings.
Recommendation
Ensure that the HttpOnly flag is set for all cookies.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-1004 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | A6 - Security Misconfiguration |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 | A5 - Security Misconfiguration |
Evidence
| URL | Cookie Name | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| https://www.stjude.org/ | bm_sz | Set-Cookie: bm_sz=E1B20DE42304C1BAFF3DDD4E12B01220~YAAQMO1lX5F/v16UAQAArefPYRr9qegkOuyHGpVVcqhoKffkkPeCqeK/axMrdM+eYTx4Yi7Q4cnDcJDfXO0pbWgAok9ekfwyJy/dfOKFnQWbMiG2KAfvlH0wcK3Mq4D2IUIfRdRYJJIBumDSiV76NGcSFkljD252D4Rpayk1+QQDYA2hJtO1M1nOfjCxV7VYvjBXY53Bp7TBcdKai/S1fj9JUlJlsM1bmWtyiTFvmw/PPW8B52Ez+DXYkSEHyRCMPyL5BhjolRXLbL9UWvDAESfRGvKvJuLA6TOfpt3RLcbtPQEasLOdbLvic1yD7W9MAYUqwOdjKvy+16zNRTplIwsdpXmOAW/PYyU0qBM=~4601414~4605240 |
Vulnerability description
We found that a cookie has been set without the <code>Secure</code> flag, which means the browser will send it over an unencrypted channel (plain HTTP) if such a request is made. The root cause for this usually revolves around misconfigurations in the code or server settings.
Recommendation
Whenever a cookie contains sensitive information or is a session token, then it should always be passed using an encrypted channel. Ensure that the secure flag is set for cookies containing such sensitive information.
Classification
| CWE | CWE-614 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | A6 - Security Misconfiguration |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 | A5 - Security Misconfiguration |
Evidence
| URL | Cookie Name | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| https://www.stjude.org/ | StJudeSite | Set-Cookie: .stjude.org |
Vulnerability description
We found that the target application sets cookies with a domain scope that is too broad. Specifically, cookies intended for use within a particular application are configured in such a way that they can be accessed by multiple subdomains of the same primary domain.
Recommendation
The `Domain` attribute should be set to the origin host to limit the scope to that particular server. For example if the application resides on server app.mysite.com, then it should be set to `Domain=app.mysite.com`
Classification
| CWE | CWE-614 |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2017 | A6 - Security Misconfiguration |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 | A5 - Security Misconfiguration |
Evidence
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://www.stjude.org/ | 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'. script-src: script-src directive is missing. object-src: Missing object-src allows the injection of plugins which can execute JavaScript. We recommend setting it to 'none'. 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: The default-src directive should be set as a fall-back when other restrictions have not been specified. ` |
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
| URL | Evidence |
|---|---|
| https://www.stjude.org/ | 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 <code>Referrer-Policy</code> HTTP header, which controls how much referrer information the browser will send with each request originated from the current web application.
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 | A6 - Security Misconfiguration |
| OWASP Top 10 - 2021 | A5 - Security Misconfiguration |
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| AdRoll | Advertising, Retargeting |
| Akamai | CDN |
| Boomerang | JavaScript libraries, RUM |
| Adobe Experience Platform Identity Service | Customer data platform |
| Adobe Experience Platform Launch | Tag managers |
| LazySizes | JavaScript libraries, Performance |
| jQuery Migrate 3.3.0 | JavaScript libraries |
| Apache HTTP Server 2.4.37 | Web servers |
| Java | Programming languages |
| jQuery | JavaScript libraries |
| Modernizr | JavaScript libraries |
| Open Graph | Miscellaneous |
| OpenSSL 1.1.1k | Web server extensions |
| Adobe Analytics | Analytics |
| Adobe Experience Manager | CMS |
| Adobe Target 2.10.0 | A/B Testing, Personalisation |
| Akamai Bot Manager | Security |
| Brightcove | Video players |
| Classy | Fundraising & donations |
| DigiCert | SSL/TLS certificate authorities |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| OneTrust | Cookie compliance |
| Red Hat | Operating systems |
| 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 |
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.
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).
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
| Risk level | CVSS | CVE | Summary | Exploit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | CVE-2022-1292 | The c_rehash script does not properly sanitise shell metacharacters to prevent command injection. This script is distributed by some operating systems in a manner where it is automatically executed. On such operating systems, an attacker could execute arbitrary commands with the privileges of the script. Use of the c_rehash script is considered obsolete and should be replaced by the OpenSSL rehash command line tool. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.3 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1,3.0.2). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1o (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1n). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2ze (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2zd). | N/A | |
| 10 | CVE-2022-2068 | In addition to the c_rehash shell command injection identified in CVE-2022-1292, further circumstances where the c_rehash script does not properly sanitise shell metacharacters to prevent command injection were found by code review. When the CVE-2022-1292 was fixed it was not discovered that there are other places in the script where the file names of certificates being hashed were possibly passed to a command executed through the shell. This script is distributed by some operating systems in a manner where it is automatically executed. On such operating systems, an attacker could execute arbitrary commands with the privileges of the script. Use of the c_rehash script is considered obsolete and should be replaced by the OpenSSL rehash command line tool. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.4 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1,3.0.2,3.0.3). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1p (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1o). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2zf (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2ze). | N/A | |
| 7.8 | CVE-2023-4807 | Issue summary: The POLY1305 MAC (message authentication code) implementation contains a bug that might corrupt the internal state of applications on the Windows 64 platform when running on newer X86_64 processors supporting the AVX512-IFMA instructions. Impact summary: If in an application that uses the OpenSSL library an attacker can influence whether the POLY1305 MAC algorithm is used, the application state might be corrupted with various application dependent consequences. The POLY1305 MAC (message authentication code) implementation in OpenSSL does not save the contents of non-volatile XMM registers on Windows 64 platform when calculating the MAC of data larger than 64 bytes. Before returning to the caller all the XMM registers are set to zero rather than restoring their previous content. The vulnerable code is used only on newer x86_64 processors supporting the AVX512-IFMA instructions. The consequences of this kind of internal application state corruption can be various - from no consequences, if the calling application does not depend on the contents of non-volatile XMM registers at all, to the worst consequences, where the attacker could get complete control of the application process. However given the contents of the registers are just zeroized so the attacker cannot put arbitrary values inside, the most likely consequence, if any, would be an incorrect result of some application dependent calculations or a crash leading to a denial of service. The POLY1305 MAC algorithm is most frequently used as part of the CHACHA20-POLY1305 AEAD (authenticated encryption with associated data) algorithm. The most common usage of this AEAD cipher is with TLS protocol versions 1.2 and 1.3 and a malicious client can influence whether this AEAD cipher is used by the server. This implies that server applications using OpenSSL can be potentially impacted. However we are currently not aware of any concrete application that would be affected by this issue therefore we consider this a Low severity security issue. As a workaround the AVX512-IFMA instructions support can be disabled at runtime by setting the environment variable OPENSSL_ia32cap: OPENSSL_ia32cap=:~0x200000 The FIPS provider is not affected by this issue. | N/A | |
| 7.5 | CVE-2021-3711 | In order to decrypt SM2 encrypted data an application is expected to call the API function EVP_PKEY_decrypt(). Typically an application will call this function twice. The first time, on entry, the "out" parameter can be NULL and, on exit, the "outlen" parameter is populated with the buffer size required to hold the decrypted plaintext. The application can then allocate a sufficiently sized buffer and call EVP_PKEY_decrypt() again, but this time passing a non-NULL value for the "out" parameter. A bug in the implementation of the SM2 decryption code means that the calculation of the buffer size required to hold the plaintext returned by the first call to EVP_PKEY_decrypt() can be smaller than the actual size required by the second call. This can lead to a buffer overflow when EVP_PKEY_decrypt() is called by the application a second time with a buffer that is too small. A malicious attacker who is able present SM2 content for decryption to an application could cause attacker chosen data to overflow the buffer by up to a maximum of 62 bytes altering the contents of other data held after the buffer, possibly changing application behaviour or causing the application to crash. The location of the buffer is application dependent but is typically heap allocated. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1l (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1k). | N/A | |
| 7.5 | CVE-2022-4450 | The function PEM_read_bio_ex() reads a PEM file from a BIO and parses and decodes the "name" (e.g. "CERTIFICATE"), any header data and the payload data. If the function succeeds then the "name_out", "header" and "data" arguments are populated with pointers to buffers containing the relevant decoded data. The caller is responsible for freeing those buffers. It is possible to construct a PEM file that results in 0 bytes of payload data. In this case PEM_read_bio_ex() will return a failure code but will populate the header argument with a pointer to a buffer that has already been freed. If the caller also frees this buffer then a double free will occur. This will most likely lead to a crash. This could be exploited by an attacker who has the ability to supply malicious PEM files for parsing to achieve a denial of service attack. The functions PEM_read_bio() and PEM_read() are simple wrappers around PEM_read_bio_ex() and therefore these functions are also directly affected. These functions are also called indirectly by a number of other OpenSSL functions including PEM_X509_INFO_read_bio_ex() and SSL_CTX_use_serverinfo_file() which are also vulnerable. Some OpenSSL internal uses of these functions are not vulnerable because the caller does not free the header argument if PEM_read_bio_ex() returns a failure code. These locations include the PEM_read_bio_TYPE() functions as well as the decoders introduced in OpenSSL 3.0. The OpenSSL asn1parse command line application is also impacted by this issue. | N/A |
Vulnerability description
Vulnerabilities found for OpenSSL 1.1.1k
Recommendation
We recommend you to upgrade the affected software to the latest version in order to eliminate the risks imposed by these vulnerabilities.
Evidence
| Risk level | CVSS | CVE | Summary | Exploit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9.8 | CVE-2023-25690 | Some mod_proxy configurations on Apache HTTP Server versions 2.4.0 through 2.4.55 allow a HTTP Request Smuggling attack. Configurations are affected when mod_proxy is enabled along with some form of RewriteRule or ProxyPassMatch in which a non-specific pattern matches some portion of the user-supplied request-target (URL) data and is then re-inserted into the proxied request-target using variable substitution. For example, something like: RewriteEngine on RewriteRule "^/here/(.*)" "http://example.com:8080/elsewhere?$1"; [P] ProxyPassReverse /here/ http://example.com:8080/ Request splitting/smuggling could result in bypass of access controls in the proxy server, proxying unintended URLs to existing origin servers, and cache poisoning. Users are recommended to update to at least version 2.4.56 of Apache HTTP Server. | N/A | |
| 9.8 | CVE-2024-38474 | Substitution encoding issue in mod_rewrite in Apache HTTP Server 2.4.59 and earlier allows attacker to execute scripts in directories permitted by the configuration but not directly reachable by any URL or source disclosure of scripts meant to only to be executed as CGI. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 2.4.60, which fixes this issue. Some RewriteRules that capture and substitute unsafely will now fail unless rewrite flag "UnsafeAllow3F" is specified. | N/A | |
| 9.8 | CVE-2024-38476 | Vulnerability in core of Apache HTTP Server 2.4.59 and earlier are vulnerably to information disclosure, SSRF or local script execution via backend applications whose response headers are malicious or exploitable. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 2.4.60, which fixes this issue. | N/A | |
| 9 | CVE-2022-36760 | Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request Smuggling') vulnerability in mod_proxy_ajp of Apache HTTP Server allows an attacker to smuggle requests to the AJP server it forwards requests to. This issue affects Apache HTTP Server Apache HTTP Server 2.4 version 2.4.54 and prior versions. | N/A | |
| 7.8 | CVE-2019-9517 | Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to unconstrained interal data buffering, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker opens the HTTP/2 window so the peer can send without constraint; however, they leave the TCP window closed so the peer cannot actually write (many of) the bytes on the wire. The attacker then sends a stream of requests for a large response object. Depending on how the servers queue the responses, this can consume excess memory, CPU, or both. | N/A |
Vulnerability description
Vulnerabilities found for Apache HTTP Server 2.4.37
Recommendation
We recommend you to upgrade the affected software to the latest version in order to eliminate the risks imposed by these vulnerabilities.
Recommendation
To mitigate the risks associated with end-of-life (EOL) software, it's crucial to take proactive steps. Start by identifying any EOL software currently in use within your organization. Once identified, prioritize upgrading or replacing these applications with supported versions that receive regular updates and security patches. This not only helps close security gaps but also ensures better compatibility with newer technologies, enhancing overall system efficiency and reliability.Additionally, develop a comprehensive software lifecycle management plan. This plan should include regular audits to identify upcoming EOL dates and a schedule for timely updates or replacements. Train your IT staff and users about the importance of keeping software up to date and the risks associated with using outdated versions. By maintaining a proactive approach to software management, you can significantly reduce security risks, ensure compliance with industry regulations, and protect your organization's reputation and customer trust.
Evidence
| Domain Queried | DNS Record Type | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| www.stjude.org | A | IPv4 address | 104.78.162.37 |
| www.stjude.org | CNAME | Canonical name | www.wip.stjude.org |
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.
Recommendation
Vulnerability checks are skipped for ports that redirect to another port. We recommend scanning the redirected port directly.
Evidence
| Software / Version | Category |
|---|---|
| Adobe Experience Manager | CMS |
| Java | Programming languages |
| Red Hat | Operating systems |
| Brightcove | Video players |
| OpenSSL 1.1.1k | Web server extensions |
| Classy | Fundraising & donations |
| Apache HTTP Server 2.4.37 | Web servers |
| reCAPTCHA | Security |
| OneTrust | Cookie compliance |
| Modernizr | JavaScript libraries |
| jQuery | JavaScript libraries |
| Akamai Bot Manager | Security |
| AdRoll | Advertising, Retargeting |
| HSTS | Security |
| DigiCert | SSL/TLS certificate authorities |
| Akamai | CDN |
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.