IP Threat Report
148.187.0.210
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Danger strong hits: 2 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +50 | |
| 404 ratio 40-60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +15 | |
| Probe pattern 302->404 same path | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +20 |
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 148.187.0.210 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 148.187.0.0/24
- Report abuse to the network provider via their abuse contact
- Ensure sensitive files (.env, .git, backups) are not accessible from the web
🔎 Directory Scan Defense
IP 148.187.0.210 is enumerating directories. Configure fail2ban apache-404 jail after 10+ 404 errors. Disable directory listings. Normalize all 404 responses.
Neighbors in 148.187.0.0/24
Other blocked IPs from the same /24 subnet — indicates systematic abuse from this network range.
Open Ports & Services
Network reconnaissance data from Shodan. Open ports may indicate running services, misconfigurations, or potential attack surfaces.
| Port | Service | Risk | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1080 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 1080 |
| 8080 | HTTP-Alt | Low | HTTP alternative port — often used for admin panels or proxies |
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
148.187.0.210 has been assigned a threat score of 85/100 (Critical). This places it in the critical threat category. Immediate blocking is strongly advised across all network perimeters.
The following attack categories were identified:
📊 Threat Analysis
Network traffic from 148.187.0.210, located in Zurich, Switzerland, operating on the network of Centro Svizzero di Calcolo Scientifico, has been classified as malicious by our automated threat scoring engine. Over a period of 1 days, this IP generated 1 malicious requests, averaging approximately 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. Active path scanning has been detected — this IP probes for hundreds of common file and directory names. Switzerland currently accounts for 108 blocked IPs in our database, making it a significant source of malicious traffic. At 85/100, this IP warrants immediate defensive action.
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 Switzerland
51.107.69.151 (280)20.250.10.152 (280)20.203.180.135 (280)20.203.136.132 (280)20.203.129.217 (280)View all →🏢 Same network: AS559
153.109.180.36 (170)82.130.119.6 (135)148.187.0.214 (85)148.187.0.212 (85)148.187.0.215 (85)View all →Security Intelligence
💡 Credential Stuffing at Scale
Credential stuffing uses stolen username-password pairs from data breaches to attempt logins across many websites. Since users frequently reuse passwords, these automated attacks achieve success rates of 0.1-2%, which translates to thousands of compromised accounts from millions of attempts.
💡 Web Application Firewall Strategies
WAFs inspect HTTP traffic to block common attacks but require careful tuning. Overly aggressive rules cause false positives while permissive configurations miss attacks. Modern WAFs combine signature matching with behavioral analysis and machine learning.