21/tcp
FTP
first 2026-08-23 · last 2026-08-23
- Banner
- 220 (vsFTPd 3.0.5)
Raw response
220 (vsFTPd 3.0.5)
Host
102.165.96.93
Tags: Expired certificate
As of our latest check on 2026-08-23, 102.165.96.93 (Société Malienne de Transmission et de Diffusion, AS328284, Mali) had 3 open ports (21, 80, 443) and 6 known CVEs.
Known CVEs on this host
3open ports
0names pointing here
6known CVEs
0known exploited
Open ports and CVEs as of our latest check of this host, 2026-08-23.
CVEs by severity: HIGH 4 MEDIUM 1 LOW 1
A match is an indication, not proof: it is based on the software version a service reported, and fixes are often backported without changing the version. See the list
Not counted: 59 on a distribution build — the fix may be backported (http_server 2.4.58). See them
Not counted: 2 only affect another platform (http_server 2.4.58). See them
- Network
- Société Malienne de Transmission et de Diffusion AS328284
- Open ports
- 21, 80, 443 · at our latest check, 2026-08-23
- Location
- Mali ML
- Route
- 102.165.96.0/24 · announced by Société Malienne de Transmission et de Diffusion AS328284 no RPKI authorisation
- Organisation
- Société Malienne de Transmission et de Diffusion · Government
- Registry network
- SMDT1-v4 · 102.165.96.0 - 102.165.111.255 · Société Malienne de Transmission et de Diffusion · AFRINIC
- First seen
- 2026-08-23 18:07 UTC
- Last seen alive
- 2026-08-23 18:11 UTC
- Hosted domains
- No host name points here
Reputation
Not a Tor relay, not a VPN or privacy relay address, and not on a current public blocklist.
Services (3)
- Status
- 500 Internal Server Error
- Title
- WordPress > Erreur
- Server
- Apache/2.4.58 (Ubuntu)
Raw response
HTTP/1.1 500 Internal Server Error
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2026 18:08:21 GMT
Server: Apache/2.4.58 (Ubuntu)
Expires: Wed, 11 Jan 1984 05:00:00 GMT
Cache-Control: no-cache, must-revalidate, max-age=0, no-store, private
Content-Length: 2688
Connection: close
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html dir="ltr" lang="fr-FR" prefix="og: https://ogp.me/ns#">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" />
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0">
<meta name='robots' content='max-image-preview:large, noindex, follow' />
<title>WordPress > Erreur</title>
<style type="text/css">
html {
background: #f1f1f1;
}
body {
background: #fff;
border: 1px solid #ccd0d4;
color: #444;
font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, "Segoe UI", Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, "Helvetica Neue", sans-serif;
margin: 2em auto;
padding: 1em 2em;
max-width: 700p
443/tcp
TLS
first 2026-08-23 · last 2026-08-23
- TLS
- TLSv1.2
- Certificate for
- refondation.gouv.ml
- Issued by
- YE2
- Valid
- 2026-06-26 → 2026-09-24
Raw response
HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2026 18:08:21 GMT Server: Apache/2.4.58 (Ubuntu) Content-Length: 447 Connection: close Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN"> <html><head> <title>400 Bad Request</title> </head><body> <h1>Bad Request</h1> <p>Your browser sent a request that this server could not understand.<br /> Reason: You're speaking plain HTTP to an SSL-enabled server port.<br /> Instead use the HTTPS scheme to access this URL, please.<br /> </p> <hr> <address>Apache/2.4.58 (Ubuntu) Server at refondation.gouv.ml Port 80</address> </body></html>
Vulnerabilities
Distribution build — the fix may be backported (59)
These CVEs were matched on software built by an operating-system distribution whose package revision the service does not show. Distributions often fix a flaw without changing the upstream version number, so whether this build is affected cannot be told from its version. They are not counted. 1 of them is known to be exploited.
CVEs by severity: CRITICAL 11 HIGH 34 MEDIUM 14
| CVE | Software |
|---|---|
| CVE-2024-38475 CRITICAL 9.1 known exploited | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2024-38474 CRITICAL 9.8 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2024-38476 CRITICAL 9.8 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-28780 CRITICAL 9.8 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-29167 CRITICAL 9.8 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-44631 CRITICAL 9.8 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-56154 CRITICAL 9.8 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-57941 CRITICAL 9.8 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-59797 CRITICAL 9.8 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2025-23048 CRITICAL 9.1 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-42535 CRITICAL 9.1 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-24072 HIGH 8.8 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-93546 HIGH 8.8 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2025-58098 HIGH 8.3 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2024-38473 HIGH 8.1 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-73636 HIGH 8.1 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2024-27316 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2024-38472 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2024-38477 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2024-39573 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2024-42516 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2024-43204 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2024-47252 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2025-49630 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2025-53020 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2025-55753 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2025-59775 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-29169 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-34059 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-34355 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-34356 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-42536 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-49975 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-59685 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-63045 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-63292 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-63686 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-63718 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2025-49812 HIGH 7.4 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2023-38709 HIGH 7.3 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-29168 HIGH 7.3 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-44185 HIGH 7.3 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-44186 HIGH 7.3 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-48913 HIGH 7.3 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-73637 HIGH 7.3 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2025-65082 MEDIUM 6.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-33523 MEDIUM 6.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-43951 MEDIUM 6.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2024-24795 MEDIUM 6.3 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-29170 MEDIUM 6.1 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-44119 MEDIUM 5.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2024-36387 MEDIUM 5.4 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2025-66200 MEDIUM 5.4 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-33007 MEDIUM 5.3 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-33857 MEDIUM 5.3 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-34032 MEDIUM 5.3 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-58415 MEDIUM 5.3 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-79768 MEDIUM 5.3 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2026-33006 MEDIUM 4.8 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
Only affects another platform (2)
These CVEs need a platform this host visibly does not run (for example a flaw of the Windows build on a Linux host). They are not counted.
CVEs by severity: HIGH 2
| CVE | Software |
|---|---|
| CVE-2024-40898 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
| CVE-2024-43394 HIGH 7.5 | http_server 2.4.58 · port 80 |
Port history
Every port that has answered a connection on this address, and when. A port is listed as open above only when a service was identified on it. Times are UTC.