IP Threat Report
144.124.244.222
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Form spam: no_js_check | Spam/malware keywords in request content | +0 | |
| Burst: 5 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Foreign referer seen | Referer from unrelated external domain | +10 |
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
Recommendations
Actions taken & recommended
- IP 144.124.244.222 is blocked at application level (HTTP 403)
- Consider blocking at firewall level (iptables/CSF) to reduce server load
- Report abuse to the network provider via their abuse contact
- Ensure sensitive files (.env, .git, backups) are not accessible from the web
📧 Spam Protection
Enable CAPTCHA on all public forms. Add honeypot fields. Rate-limit submissions to 3 per minute per IP. Deploy Akismet or CleanTalk.
🌊 Traffic Flood Defense
IP 144.124.244.222 is generating excessive traffic. Limit connections per source IP. Enable geographic blocking if traffic from this region is unexpected.
Open Ports & Services
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 |
| 135 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 135 |
| 443 | HTTPS | Low | HTTPS web server — encrypted web traffic |
| 445 | SMB | Critical | SMB file sharing — high-risk for EternalBlue and ransomware |
| 3389 | RDP | High | Remote Desktop Protocol — primary target for ransomware attacks |
⚠️ 2 high-risk ports detected on 144.124.244.222. Exposed RDP (3389) is the #1 entry point for ransomware attacks. SMB (445) exposure is associated with worm propagation and EternalBlue exploits. These services should not be publicly accessible without strict firewall rules.
Data source: Shodan InternetDB. Scanned independently of abuse.mom.
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
144.124.244.222 has been assigned a threat score of 70/100 (High). This classifies it as a high-severity threat. Proactive blocking is recommended for sensitive infrastructure.
The following attack categories were identified:
📊 Threat Analysis
Our monitoring infrastructure has identified 144.124.244.222, geolocated to Amsterdam, Netherlands, operating on the network of Servers Tech Fzco, as a source of suspicious network activity. Our sensors captured 2 malicious requests from this address across a 31-day span, reflecting a sustained attack cadence of ~0.1 requests per day. Operating from datacenter infrastructure, this IP is typical of addresses used in organized attack operations. Cloud and VPS providers are commonly exploited as launching platforms for automated scanning. The IP is engaged in request flooding, sending traffic at rates designed to exhaust server capacity. Netherlands currently accounts for 178 blocked IPs in our database, making it a significant source of malicious traffic. The score of 70/100 indicates a confirmed malicious actor. Network-level blocking is appropriate.
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 Netherlands
185.184.192.251 (338)45.88.138.44 (320)45.82.64.236 (315)5.181.169.192 (313)157.22.73.141 (313)View all →Security Intelligence
💡 SQL Injection Campaigns
SQL injection remains one of the most common web attack vectors. Attackers inject malicious SQL code through input fields to extract database contents, modify data, or gain administrative access. Automated scanners test for SQLi vulnerabilities at massive scale.
💡 Security Header Best Practices
HTTP security headers provide defense-in-depth with minimal implementation effort. Key headers include Strict-Transport-Security, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, Referrer-Policy, and Permissions-Policy, each addressing specific attack vectors.