
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| UA suspicious (short/empty) | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +15 | |
| Danger strong hits: 2 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +50 | |
| Danger medium hits: 2 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +20 | |
| 404 ratio 40-60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +15 | |
| Probe pattern 302->404 same path | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +20 |
Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
Address UA spoofing from 143.198.32.193: maintain blocklist of known malicious UA strings, require consistent UA across sessions, implement TLS fingerprinting.
IP 143.198.32.193 is enumerating directories. Configure fail2ban apache-404 jail after 10+ 404 errors. Disable directory listings. Normalize all 404 responses.
Network reconnaissance data from Shodan. Open ports may indicate running services, misconfigurations, or potential attack surfaces.
| Port | Service | Risk | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 22 | SSH | Low | Secure Shell — common brute force target for remote access |
| 80 | HTTP | Low | HTTP web server — standard web traffic |
| 443 | HTTPS | Low | HTTPS web server — encrypted web traffic |
| CVE ID | Link |
|---|---|
| CVE-2025-59775 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-25690 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-11993 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-39573 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-26690 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-13950 | NVD → |
| CVE-2022-23943 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-40438 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-27522 | NVD → |
| CVE-2013-2765 | NVD → |
| CVE-2022-26377 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-38477 | NVD → |
| CVE-2013-0941 | NVD → |
| CVE-2022-30556 | NVD → |
| CVE-2022-22719 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-38709 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-36160 | NVD → |
| CVE-2013-0942 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-26691 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-38473 | NVD → |
| CVE-2012-3526 | NVD → |
| CVE-2022-31813 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-35452 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-24795 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-43204 | NVD → |
🔴 This host has 77 known CVEs associated with its exposed services. This volume strongly suggests severely outdated software. Review each CVE in the NVD database.
Data source: Shodan InternetDB. Scanned independently of abuse.mom.
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.
143.198.32.193 has been assigned a threat score of 120/100 (Critical). This represents a critical risk level. Our detection systems have flagged multiple high-confidence indicators of malicious intent from this address.
The following attack categories were identified:
The address 143.198.32.193 originates from Toronto, Canada, operating on the network of DigitalOcean, LLC. It was identified through automated analysis of incoming network traffic across monitored endpoints. Over a period of 1 days, this IP generated 1 malicious requests, averaging approximately 1 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. Two attack patterns were identified (User-Agent Anomaly and Path Enumeration), suggesting a semi-automated campaign that targets multiple vulnerabilities. With 106 flagged addresses, Canada represents a significant presence in our threat database. A score of 120/100 places this address in the top tier of severity. Block and investigate any historical connections.
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.
Analyzing User-Agent strings reveals automated tools masquerading as legitimate browsers. Inconsistencies between claimed browser capabilities and actual behavior, impossible version combinations, and known scanner signatures help identify malicious clients.
False positives erode trust in security systems and waste analyst resources. Effective management requires feedback loops, allowlisting mechanisms, contextual analysis, and regular tuning of detection rules based on operational experience.