
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| 404 ratio 40-60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +15 | |
| Burst 15/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 16/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 50/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 51/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 53/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 54/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 55/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 56/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger medium hits: 175 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger medium hits: 232 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger medium hits: 348 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger strong hits: 28 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger strong hits: 32 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger strong hits: 35 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger strong hits: 49 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Probe 302→404 | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +20 | |
| UA suspicious | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +15 |
Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
IP 137.116.139.215 is enumerating directories. Configure fail2ban apache-404 jail after 10+ 404 errors. Disable directory listings. Normalize all 404 responses.
Implement limit_req_zone in nginx. Deploy CDN with DDoS protection. Configure SYN cookies and connection tracking to throttle 137.116.139.215.
Address UA spoofing from 137.116.139.215: maintain blocklist of known malicious UA strings, require consistent UA across sessions, implement TLS fingerprinting.
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.
137.116.139.215 has been assigned a threat score of 280/100 (Critical). A score this high marks a critical threat actor. This address has demonstrated persistent, aggressive malicious behavior across multiple detection vectors.
The following attack categories were identified:
Network traffic from 137.116.139.215, located in Singapore, Singapore, operating on the network of Microsoft Corporation, has been classified as malicious by our automated threat scoring engine. Over a period of 4 days, this IP generated 671 malicious requests, averaging approximately 167.8 requests per day. The IP is classified as hosting/datacenter infrastructure, commonly associated with rented servers used for automated attack campaigns, botnet command-and-control, or vulnerability scanning at scale. The combination of 3 distinct attack vectors indicates a sophisticated, multi-pronged threat actor deploying automated tools that probe multiple attack surfaces simultaneously. With a threat score of 280/100, this IP is among the most dangerous addresses in our database. Immediate and complete blocking is strongly 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.
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.
Blocking traffic from specific countries reduces attack surface but impacts legitimate international users. Effective geo-based policies use tiered approaches — blocking, rate limiting, or requiring additional verification based on risk assessment.