
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Burst: 14 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 21 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Foreign referer seen | Referer from unrelated external domain | +10 |
Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
Implement limit_req_zone in nginx. Deploy CDN with DDoS protection. Configure SYN cookies and connection tracking to throttle 128.71.123.122.
This IP was checked against major DNS-based blacklists used by mail servers and firewalls worldwide.
Checked: Spamhaus, SpamCop, Barracuda, SORBS, CBL, UCEProtect. Results may change over time.
128.71.123.122 has been assigned a threat score of 80/100 (Critical). This places it in the critical threat category. Immediate blocking is strongly advised across all network perimeters.
The following attack categories were identified:
128.71.123.122 is registered in Moscow, Russia, operating on the network of 16345 Mobile Region. This IP first appeared in our threat feeds after triggering multiple behavioral detection signatures. Our sensors captured 1 malicious requests from this address across a 1-day span, reflecting a sustained attack cadence of ~1 requests per day. This is a mobile network IP. While mobile addresses are typically shared via CGNAT, persistent malicious activity from this specific address suggests automated abuse. Rate-based attacks from this IP aim to overwhelm server resources through high-volume request flooding. Russia currently accounts for 108 blocked IPs in our database, making it a significant source of malicious traffic. At 80/100, this IP warrants immediate defensive action.
Distributed denial of service attacks overwhelm infrastructure with traffic volume. Effective mitigation combines always-on traffic scrubbing, anycast network distribution, rate limiting, and the ability to quickly scale absorption capacity during attacks.
When multiple IPs in a subnet show malicious behavior, subnet blocking efficiently neutralizes the threat. However, overly broad blocking risks impacting legitimate users. Analysis of subnet ownership and historical behavior guides appropriate blocking scope.