IP Threat Report
158.94.211.226
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| UA suspicious (short/empty) | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +15 | |
| Danger strong hits: 13 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger medium hits: 7 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Burst: 19 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 19 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| POST requests present | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +8 |
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 158.94.211.226 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 158.94.211.0/24
- Report abuse to the network provider via their abuse contact
- Ensure sensitive files (.env, .git, backups) are not accessible from the web
🤖 Bot Detection
Address UA spoofing from 158.94.211.226: maintain blocklist of known malicious UA strings, require consistent UA across sessions, implement TLS fingerprinting.
🌊 Flood / DDoS Mitigation
Implement limit_req_zone in nginx. Deploy CDN with DDoS protection. Configure SYN cookies and connection tracking to throttle 158.94.211.226.
Neighbors in 158.94.211.0/24
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 21 | FTP | Medium | File Transfer Protocol — often targeted for anonymous login attacks |
| 22 | SSH | Low | Secure Shell — common brute force target for remote access |
| 25 | SMTP | Medium | SMTP mail server — can be abused for spam relay |
| 53 | DNS | Low | DNS server — potential for DNS amplification attacks |
| 80 | HTTP | Low | HTTP web server — standard web traffic |
| 110 | POP3 | Low | Service on port 110 |
| 143 | IMAP | Low | Service on port 143 |
| 443 | HTTPS | Low | HTTPS web server — encrypted web traffic |
| 465 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 465 |
| 587 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 587 |
| 993 | IMAPS | Low | Service on port 993 |
| 995 | POP3S | Low | Service on port 995 |
| 3389 | RDP | High | Remote Desktop Protocol — primary target for ransomware attacks |
| 7001 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 7001 |
| 8000 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 8000 |
⚠️ 2 high-risk ports detected on 158.94.211.226. Exposed RDP (3389) is the #1 entry point for ransomware attacks. These services should not be publicly accessible without strict firewall rules.
| CVE ID | Link |
|---|---|
| CVE-2019-0190 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-26465 | NVD → |
| CVE-2012-3526 | NVD → |
| CVE-2011-2688 | NVD → |
| CVE-2013-0941 | NVD → |
| CVE-2011-1176 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-32728 | NVD → |
| CVE-2007-2768 | NVD → |
| CVE-2013-2765 | NVD → |
| CVE-2008-3844 | NVD → |
| CVE-2013-0942 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-42516 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-49630 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-55753 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-23048 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-58098 | NVD → |
| CVE-2009-3766 | NVD → |
| CVE-2009-0796 | NVD → |
| CVE-2012-4001 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-26466 | NVD → |
| CVE-2009-1390 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-47252 | NVD → |
| CVE-2009-3767 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-43204 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-51767 | NVD → |
🔴 Security scanning identified 36 vulnerability entries on this host. This volume strongly suggests severely outdated software. Consult NVD advisories for details.
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
158.94.211.226 has been assigned a threat score of 253/100 (Critical). This is a critical-level threat. Systems administrators should treat this IP as hostile and block all inbound connections without exception.
The following attack categories were identified:
📊 Threat Analysis
Threat intelligence analysis has linked 158.94.211.226 to malicious activity originating from New York, United States, operating on the network of Omegatech LTD. The address has been under observation since its initial detection. During its 1-day observation window, we recorded 1 hostile requests from this IP — roughly 1 per day on average. This is a residential IP address, suggesting a compromised home device such as a router, smart appliance, or infected workstation participating in a botnet. Two attack patterns were identified (User-Agent Anomaly and Request Flooding), suggesting a semi-automated campaign that targets multiple vulnerabilities. A score of 253/100 places this address in the top tier of severity. Block and investigate any historical connections.
This IP is classified as residential, suggesting it may belong to a compromised home device, IoT botnet member, or an infected personal computer. Residential IPs involved in attacks often indicate malware infection without the owner's knowledge.
Related Threats
🇺🇸 Top threats from United States
178.16.55.142 (300)91.92.243.240 (175)158.94.211.188 (90)91.92.243.209 (65)View all →Security Intelligence
💡 HTTP Header Analysis for Threat Detection
Examining HTTP headers beyond User-Agent reveals attack tools and automated scripts. Missing standard headers, unusual ordering, non-standard values, and inconsistencies with claimed client identity all serve as reliable detection signals.
💡 DNS-Based Threat Detection
Monitoring DNS queries reveals malicious activity including command-and-control communication, data exfiltration through DNS tunneling, and connections to known malicious domains. DNS is often the first indicator of compromise in network forensics.