IP Threat Report
163.7.11.237
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| 404 ratio 40-60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +15 | |
| 404 ratio >= 60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +25 | |
| Burst 39/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 43/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 83/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 98/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger medium hits: 16 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger medium hits: 8 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger strong hits: 11 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger strong hits: 18 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger strong hits: 22 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Foreign referer | Referer from unrelated external domain | +10 |
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 163.7.11.237 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 163.7.11.0/24
- Report abuse to the network provider via their abuse contact
- Ensure sensitive files (.env, .git, backups) are not accessible from the web
🔎 Path Enumeration Protection
Block scanning from 163.7.11.237: rate-limit 404 responses per IP, deploy a honeypot 404 page, ensure no backup files are web-accessible.
🌊 Traffic Flood Defense
IP 163.7.11.237 is generating excessive traffic. Limit connections per source IP. Enable geographic blocking if traffic from this region is unexpected.
Neighbors in 163.7.11.0/24
Other blocked IPs from the same /24 subnet — indicates systematic abuse from this network range.
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
163.7.11.237 has been assigned a threat score of 255/100 (Critical). With this rating, the IP falls into the critical severity bracket — among the most dangerous addresses in our monitoring database.
The following attack categories were identified:
📊 Threat Analysis
Our monitoring infrastructure has identified 163.7.11.237, geolocated to Yogyakarta, Indonesia, operating on the network of Byteplus Pte. Ltd., as a source of suspicious network activity. Our sensors captured 564 malicious requests from this address across a 4-day span, reflecting a sustained attack cadence of ~141 requests per day. 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 (Path Enumeration and Request Flooding), suggesting a semi-automated campaign that targets multiple vulnerabilities. With 110 flagged addresses, Indonesia represents a significant presence in our threat database. With a threat score of 255/100, this IP is among the most dangerous addresses in our database. Immediate and complete blocking is strongly recommended.
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 Indonesia
157.15.40.62 (340)157.15.40.88 (340)157.15.40.89 (340)157.15.40.61 (340)157.15.40.93 (340)View all →Security Intelligence
💡 DDoS Mitigation Approaches
Distributed denial of service attacks overwhelm infrastructure with traffic volume. Effective mitigation combines always-on traffic scrubbing, anycast network distribution, rate limiting, and the ability to quickly scale absorption capacity during attacks.
💡 Responsible Disclosure Ethics
Responsible disclosure balances public safety with giving vendors time to patch vulnerabilities. The security community generally supports coordinated disclosure timelines, but disagreements about appropriate timeframes and full disclosure continue to drive policy debates.