
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Danger medium hits: 2 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +20 | |
| Danger strong hits: 2 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +50 |
Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
Block 159.26.103.129 at the network perimeter. Implement defense-in-depth combining IP blocking with application-layer protections.
Other blocked IPs from the same /24 subnet — indicates systematic abuse from this network range.
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.
159.26.103.129 has been assigned a threat score of 70/100 (High). At this threat level, the IP is considered high risk. Firewall rules should be updated to deny traffic from this source.
159.26.103.129 is registered in Seattle, United States, operating on the network of Proton AG. This IP first appeared in our threat feeds after triggering multiple behavioral detection signatures. The address has been active for 1 days in our monitoring system, producing 52 flagged requests at a rate of ~52/day. This IP is identified as a VPN or proxy endpoint, commonly used to mask the true origin of attack traffic and bypass geographic or reputation-based blocking. With 36,325 flagged addresses, United States represents a major presence in our threat database. A threat score of 70/100 places this IP in the high-risk category. Blocking at the firewall level is recommended.
This IP is associated with a VPN or proxy service. Attackers frequently route their traffic through anonymizing services to obscure their true location. This makes attribution more challenging but the malicious behavior patterns remain detectable.
Vulnerability scanning is the automated process of probing web applications for known weaknesses. Attackers use tools like Nuclei, Nikto, and ZAP to test thousands of hosts per hour, looking for exposed configuration files, outdated software, and default credentials.
Modern attacks increasingly target APIs rather than traditional web interfaces. Attackers enumerate endpoints, test for broken authentication, and exploit excessive data exposure. API attacks are harder to detect as they mimic legitimate programmatic access patterns.