
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| UA suspicious (short/empty) | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +15 | |
| Danger strong hits: 16 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger medium hits: 192 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| 404 ratio 40-60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +15 | |
| Probe pattern 302->404 same path | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +20 | |
| Burst: 48 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 152 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger strong hits: 24 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Burst: 62 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 200 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 178 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 67 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 192 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 47 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 145 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger strong hits: 8 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger medium hits: 393 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Burst: 64 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger strong hits: 6 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger medium hits: 262 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Burst: 57 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 199 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.
Address UA spoofing from 172.161.140.213: maintain blocklist of known malicious UA strings, require consistent UA across sessions, implement TLS fingerprinting.
Block scanning from 172.161.140.213: rate-limit 404 responses per IP, deploy a honeypot 404 page, ensure no backup files are web-accessible.
IP 172.161.140.213 is generating excessive traffic. Limit connections per source IP. Enable geographic blocking if traffic from this region is unexpected.
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.
172.161.140.213 has been assigned a threat score of 280/100 (Critical). This represents a critical risk level. Our detection systems have flagged multiple high-confidence indicators of malicious intent from this address.
The following attack categories were identified:
Our monitoring infrastructure has identified 172.161.140.213, geolocated to Zurich, Switzerland, operating on the network of Microsoft, as a source of suspicious network activity. The address has been active for 1 days in our monitoring system, producing 7 flagged requests at a rate of ~7/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. The diversity of 3 separate attack methods suggests a comprehensive attack toolkit — likely an automated scanner that tests for vulnerabilities across multiple categories. Switzerland currently accounts for 102 blocked IPs in our database, making it a significant source of malicious traffic. A score of 280/100 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.
Analyzing User-Agent strings reveals automated tools masquerading as legitimate browsers. Inconsistencies between claimed browser capabilities and actual behavior, impossible version combinations, and known scanner signatures help identify malicious clients.
Mobile malware reaches devices through unofficial app stores, malicious links, and even occasionally through official stores using obfuscation techniques. Banking trojans, spyware, and ransomware variants specifically designed for mobile platforms continue to proliferate.