
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Burst 56/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 56/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Foreign referer | Referer from unrelated external domain | +10 |
Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
We have detected 92 malicious IPs from this autonomous system.
Implement limit_req_zone in nginx. Deploy CDN with DDoS protection. Configure SYN cookies and connection tracking to throttle 172.56.155.20.
Other blocked IPs from the same /24 subnet — indicates systematic abuse from this network range.
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.
172.56.155.20 has been assigned a threat score of 80/100 (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:
172.56.155.20 is registered in Portland, United States, operating on the network of T-Mobile USA, Inc.. This IP first appeared in our threat feeds after triggering multiple behavioral detection signatures. Our sensors captured 66 malicious requests from this address across a 3-day span, reflecting a sustained attack cadence of ~22 requests per day. This is a mobile network IP. While mobile addresses are typically shared via CGNAT, persistent malicious activity from this specific address suggests automated abuse. Rate-based attacks from this IP aim to overwhelm server resources through high-volume request flooding. Our records show 36,320 malicious IPs originating from United States, positioning it as a major contributor to global threat activity. The score of 80/100 indicates a confirmed malicious actor. Network-level blocking is appropriate.
Distributed denial of service attacks overwhelm infrastructure with traffic volume. Effective mitigation combines always-on traffic scrubbing, anycast network distribution, rate limiting, and the ability to quickly scale absorption capacity during attacks.
Processing IP addresses for security purposes under GDPR requires balancing legitimate interest in network protection with data minimization principles. Threat intelligence platforms must implement appropriate retention policies and provide mechanisms for data subject rights.