
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Foreign referer | Referer from unrelated external domain | +10 | |
| UA bot: Go-http-client | Known bot/crawler User-Agent detected | +40 | |
| UA changed | Multiple User-Agents — bot rotation technique | +25 |
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 149.102.158.103: 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.
149.102.158.103 has been assigned a threat score of 75/100 (High). This classifies it as a high-severity threat. Proactive blocking is recommended for sensitive infrastructure.
The following attack categories were identified:
The address 149.102.158.103 originates from Portsmouth, United Kingdom, operating on the network of Contabo GmbH. It was identified through automated analysis of incoming network traffic across monitored endpoints. Our sensors captured 204 malicious requests from this address across a 5-day span, reflecting a sustained attack cadence of ~40.8 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 exhibits User-Agent manipulation, switching between different browser identities or sending empty headers. A threat score of 75/100 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.
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.
CDNs can inadvertently mask the true origin of malicious traffic, making attribution difficult. Attackers abuse CDN services to proxy their attacks, leverage cached content for amplification, and exploit misconfigurations in CDN-to-origin connections.