
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Danger strong hits: 1 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +25 | |
| Danger medium hits: 16 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| 404 ratio >= 60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +25 | |
| Burst: 8 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 16 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 |
Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
Block scanning from 168.144.42.226: rate-limit 404 responses per IP, deploy a honeypot 404 page, ensure no backup files are web-accessible.
IP 168.144.42.226 is generating excessive traffic. Limit connections per source IP. Enable geographic blocking if traffic from this region is unexpected.
Other blocked IPs from the same /24 subnet — indicates systematic abuse from this network range.
Network reconnaissance data from Shodan. Open ports may indicate running services, misconfigurations, or potential attack surfaces.
| Port | Service | Risk | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 80 | HTTP | Low | HTTP web server — standard web traffic |
| CVE ID | Link |
|---|---|
| CVE-2023-38709 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-27316 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-38473 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-65082 | NVD → |
| CVE-2009-3767 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-43394 | NVD → |
| CVE-2009-0796 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-24795 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-49812 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-40898 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-5363 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-5678 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-66200 | NVD → |
| CVE-2013-4365 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-38475 | NVD → |
| CVE-2015-9251 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-0190 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-3566 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-39573 | NVD → |
| CVE-2011-1176 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-38477 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-42516 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-55753 | NVD → |
| CVE-2013-2765 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-58098 | NVD → |
🔴 This host has 55 known CVEs associated with its exposed services. This volume strongly suggests severely outdated software. Review each CVE in the NVD database.
Data source: Shodan InternetDB. Scanned independently of abuse.mom.
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.
168.144.42.226 has been assigned a threat score of 180/100 (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:
168.144.42.226 is registered in Broomfield, United States, operating on the network of DigitalOcean. 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 1 flagged requests at a rate of ~1/day. This address belongs to a datacenter or cloud hosting provider. Hosting IPs are frequently leveraged by threat actors who rent cheap VPS instances specifically for conducting attacks. The dual attack vectors of Path Enumeration combined with Request Flooding indicate a coordinated assault rather than opportunistic scanning. With 129 flagged addresses, United States represents a significant presence in our threat database. A score of 180/100 places this address in the top tier of severity. Block and investigate any historical connections.
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.
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.
GraphQL APIs introduce specific vulnerabilities including introspection information disclosure, query complexity attacks, batching abuse, and authorization bypass through nested queries. Depth limiting, cost analysis, and field-level authorization address these GraphQL-specific threats.