IP Threat Report
165.101.154.75
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Danger strong hits: 2 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +50 | |
| Danger medium hits: 1 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +10 | |
| 404 ratio 40-60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +15 | |
| 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 165.101.154.75 is blocked at application level (HTTP 403)
- Consider blocking at firewall level (iptables/CSF) to reduce server load
- 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 165.101.154.75: rate-limit 404 responses per IP, deploy a honeypot 404 page, ensure no backup files are web-accessible.
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 |
| 80 | HTTP | Low | HTTP web server — standard web traffic |
| 2000 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 2000 |
| 8291 | MikroTik | High | MikroTik Winbox — router management, targeted by VPNFilter malware |
⚠️ 2 high-risk ports detected on 165.101.154.75. These services should not be publicly accessible without strict firewall rules.
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
165.101.154.75 has been assigned a threat score of 83/100 (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
IP address 165.101.154.75 has been traced to Rodriguez, Philippines, operating on the network of Sierra.Net Network & Data Solution. Our threat detection systems have flagged this address based on observed malicious behavior patterns. Our sensors captured 1 malicious requests from this address across a 1-day span, reflecting a sustained attack cadence of ~1 requests per day. Operating from a residential network, this IP may represent a compromised home gateway or IoT device that has been drafted into a larger attack infrastructure. Active path scanning has been detected — this IP probes for hundreds of common file and directory names. Philippines currently accounts for 101 blocked IPs in our database, making it a significant source of malicious traffic. At 83/100, this IP warrants immediate defensive action.
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 Philippines
194.61.41.46 (255)103.250.62.24 (213)180.191.168.156 (208)136.158.57.53 (208)136.158.82.180 (208)View all →🏢 Same network: AS154031
View all →Security Intelligence
💡 WordPress-Specific Attack Vectors
WordPress sites face constant automated attacks targeting xmlrpc.php for brute force amplification, wp-login.php for credential theft, and vulnerable plugins for remote code execution. Over 90% of CMS-based attacks specifically target WordPress installations.
💡 Memory Safety and Buffer Overflows
Buffer overflow vulnerabilities remain relevant in C/C++ applications despite decades of mitigation efforts. Modern protections like ASLR, stack canaries, and DEP reduce exploitability but determined attackers continue finding bypass techniques.