IP Threat Report
172.161.8.38
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| UA suspicious (short/empty) | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +15 | |
| Danger strong hits: 3 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +75 | |
| Danger medium hits: 166 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Burst: 54 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 175 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger medium hits: 170 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Burst: 39 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 127 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 49 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 125 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 53 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 162 req / 10s | 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 172.161.8.38 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
🤖 Bot Detection
Address UA spoofing from 172.161.8.38: maintain blocklist of known malicious UA strings, require consistent UA across sessions, implement TLS fingerprinting.
🌊 Flood / DDoS Mitigation
Implement limit_req_zone in nginx. Deploy CDN with DDoS protection. Configure SYN cookies and connection tracking to throttle 172.161.8.38.
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
172.161.8.38 has been assigned a threat score of 220/100 (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:
📊 Threat Analysis
172.161.8.38 is registered in Zurich, Switzerland, operating on the network of Microsoft. 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 4 flagged requests at a rate of ~4/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 User-Agent Anomaly combined with Request Flooding indicate a coordinated assault rather than opportunistic scanning. Switzerland currently accounts for 101 blocked IPs in our database, making it a significant source of malicious traffic. With a threat score of 220/100, 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
🇨🇭 Top threats from Switzerland
51.107.69.151 (280)20.250.10.152 (280)20.203.180.135 (280)20.203.136.132 (280)20.203.129.217 (280)View all →Security Intelligence
💡 User-Agent Analysis Techniques
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.
💡 TLS Certificate Misconfigurations
Expired, self-signed, or misconfigured TLS certificates create security vulnerabilities and trust issues. Certificate monitoring, automated renewal through ACME protocols, and proper certificate chain configuration prevent both security gaps and service disruptions.