IP Threat Report
170.64.170.204
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Danger medium hits: 4 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +40 | |
| 404 ratio 40-60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +15 | |
| Probe pattern 302->404 same path | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +20 | |
| Foreign referer seen | Referer from unrelated external domain | +10 | |
| Danger medium hits: 8 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Burst: 5 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 |
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 170.64.170.204 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
🔎 Directory Scan Defense
IP 170.64.170.204 is enumerating directories. Configure fail2ban apache-404 jail after 10+ 404 errors. Disable directory listings. Normalize all 404 responses.
🌊 Flood / DDoS Mitigation
Implement limit_req_zone in nginx. Deploy CDN with DDoS protection. Configure SYN cookies and connection tracking to throttle 170.64.170.204.
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 |
| 22 | SSH | Low | Secure Shell — common brute force target for remote access |
| 23 | Telnet | Critical | Telnet — unencrypted remote access, extremely dangerous if exposed |
| 80 | HTTP | Low | HTTP web server — standard web traffic |
| 123 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 123 |
| 445 | SMB | Critical | SMB file sharing — high-risk for EternalBlue and ransomware |
| 2375 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 2375 |
| 3306 | MySQL | High | MySQL database — should never be exposed to the internet |
| 3389 | RDP | High | Remote Desktop Protocol — primary target for ransomware attacks |
| 5900 | VNC | High | VNC remote desktop — often found with weak or no authentication |
| 6667 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 6667 |
| 8080 | HTTP-Alt | Low | HTTP alternative port — often used for admin panels or proxies |
| 8443 | HTTPS-Alt | Low | Service on port 8443 |
⚠️ 6 high-risk ports detected on 170.64.170.204. Exposed RDP (3389) is the #1 entry point for ransomware attacks. Telnet (23) transmits credentials in plaintext — likely a compromised IoT device. SMB (445) exposure is associated with worm propagation and EternalBlue exploits. These services should not be publicly accessible without strict firewall rules.
| CVE ID | Link |
|---|---|
| CVE-2020-13938 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-25690 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-27316 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-49812 | NVD → |
| CVE-2017-15715 | NVD → |
| CVE-2009-0796 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-38477 | NVD → |
| CVE-2017-7963 | NVD → |
| CVE-2022-28615 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-44224 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-10082 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-53020 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-33193 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-38709 | NVD → |
| CVE-2013-0941 | NVD → |
| CVE-2022-23943 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-38476 | NVD → |
| CVE-2018-1333 | NVD → |
| CVE-2007-3205 | NVD → |
| CVE-2022-22721 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-42516 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-0217 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-45802 | NVD → |
| CVE-2022-28614 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-1927 | NVD → |
🔴 This host has 116 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.
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
170.64.170.204 has been assigned a threat score of 125/100 (Critical). A score this high marks a critical threat actor. This address has demonstrated persistent, aggressive malicious behavior across multiple detection vectors.
The following attack categories were identified:
📊 Threat Analysis
The address 170.64.170.204 originates from Sydney, Australia, operating on the network of DigitalOcean, LLC. It was identified through automated analysis of incoming network traffic across monitored endpoints. Over a period of 34 days, this IP generated 2 malicious requests, averaging approximately 0.1 requests per 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. Our records show 109 malicious IPs originating from Australia, positioning it as a significant contributor to global threat activity. With a threat score of 125/100, this IP is among the most dangerous addresses in our database. Immediate and complete blocking is strongly recommended.
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.
Related Threats
Security Intelligence
💡 Vulnerability Scanning Explained
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.
💡 VPN Exit Node Reputation
VPN exit nodes aggregate traffic from many users, creating mixed reputation profiles. While legitimate users seek privacy, attackers exploit VPN services to anonymize malicious activity, making IP-based blocking of VPN nodes a complex policy decision.