IP Threat Report
135.136.20.25
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Danger medium hits: 1 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +10 | |
| Danger medium hits: 3 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +30 | |
| Danger medium hits: 4 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +40 | |
| Danger medium hits: 5 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +50 | |
| Foreign referer | Referer from unrelated external domain | +10 | |
| UA changed | Multiple User-Agents — bot rotation technique | +25 |
Observed Activity
Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
Timeline
Network Provider
We have detected 515 malicious IPs from this autonomous system.
Recommendations
Actions taken & recommended
- IP 135.136.20.25 is blocked at application level (HTTP 403)
- Consider blocking at firewall level (iptables/CSF) to reduce server load
- Other malicious IPs detected in the same /24 subnet — consider blocking 135.136.20.0/24
- Report abuse to the network provider via their abuse contact
- Ensure sensitive files (.env, .git, backups) are not accessible from the web
🤖 Bot Detection
Address UA spoofing from 135.136.20.25: maintain blocklist of known malicious UA strings, require consistent UA across sessions, implement TLS fingerprinting.
Neighbors in 135.136.20.0/24
Other blocked IPs from the same /24 subnet — indicates systematic abuse from this network range.
Blacklist Status (DNSBL)
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.
Threat Analysis
135.136.20.25 has been assigned a threat score of 85/100 (Critical). This is a critical-level threat. Systems administrators should treat this IP as hostile and block all inbound connections without exception.
The following attack categories were identified:
📊 Threat Analysis
The address 135.136.20.25 originates from City of London, United Kingdom, operating on the network of M247 Europe SRL. It was identified through automated analysis of incoming network traffic across monitored endpoints. The address has been active for 26 days in our monitoring system, producing 252 flagged requests at a rate of ~9.7/day. Classified as a hosting IP, this address likely runs on a rented server or cloud instance. Attackers prefer datacenter IPs for their high bandwidth and disposable nature. The IP exhibits User-Agent manipulation, switching between different browser identities or sending empty headers. Our records show 3,205 malicious IPs originating from United Kingdom, positioning it as a major contributor to global threat activity. A threat score of 85/100 places this IP in the high-risk category. Blocking at the firewall level is recommended.
This IP belongs to a hosting or data center provider. Malicious traffic from hosting infrastructure often originates from compromised VPS instances, rented servers used for scanning campaigns, or abused free-tier cloud accounts. Hosting providers typically respond to abuse reports within 24-72 hours.
Related Threats
🇬🇧 Top threats from United Kingdom
45.86.203.126 (350)45.138.12.41 (350)91.230.225.114 (350)45.138.12.46 (350)185.192.71.72 (350)View all →🏢 Same network: AS9009
45.91.20.151 (305)158.173.36.134 (305)158.173.36.160 (305)135.136.42.150 (305)170.62.245.48 (305)View all →Security Intelligence
💡 File Upload Vulnerabilities
Insecure file upload functionality allows attackers to upload web shells, malware, or scripts that execute on the server. Proper validation must check file content, not just extensions, and uploaded files should be stored outside the web root.
💡 Tor Exit Node Detection
Tor exit nodes are publicly listed but constantly rotating. While Tor serves essential privacy functions for journalists and activists, it is also used to anonymize attacks. Effective security policies differentiate between blocking and monitoring Tor traffic.