
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Danger medium hits: 1 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +10 | |
| 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 159.26.105.62 at the network perimeter. Implement defense-in-depth combining IP blocking with application-layer protections.
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.
159.26.105.62 has been assigned a threat score of 60/100 (High). This score indicates high threat severity. The IP has shown clear patterns of malicious behavior that warrant immediate defensive measures.
Network traffic from 159.26.105.62, located in Paris, France, operating on the network of Proton AG, has been classified as malicious by our automated threat scoring engine. Over a period of 3 days, this IP generated 33 malicious requests, averaging approximately 11 requests per day. The IP is classified as hosting/datacenter infrastructure, commonly associated with rented servers used for automated attack campaigns, botnet command-and-control, or vulnerability scanning at scale. France currently accounts for 2,425 blocked IPs in our database, making it a major source of malicious traffic. The score of 60/100 warrants active monitoring and rate-limiting. Full blocking is advisable for sensitive systems.
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.
XXE vulnerabilities in XML parsers allow attackers to read local files, perform SSRF, and execute denial of service attacks. Many legacy applications and APIs remain vulnerable to XXE due to insecure default XML parser configurations.
XSS attacks inject malicious scripts into web pages viewed by other users. Reflected XSS uses crafted URLs, while stored XSS persists in databases. Both types can steal session cookies, redirect users, or deface websites.