IP Threat Report
173.212.229.68
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Danger strong hits: 3 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +75 | |
| Danger medium hits: 2 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +20 |
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 173.212.229.68 is blocked at application level (HTTP 403)
- Consider blocking at firewall level (iptables/CSF) to reduce server load
- Other malicious IPs detected in the same /24 subnet — consider blocking 173.212.229.0/24
- Report abuse to the network provider via their abuse contact
- Ensure sensitive files (.env, .git, backups) are not accessible from the web
⚙️ General Security
Add 173.212.229.68 to your firewall blocklist. Review logs for successful connections. Enable comprehensive logging on all public-facing services.
Neighbors in 173.212.229.0/24
Other blocked IPs from the same /24 subnet — indicates systematic abuse from this network range.
Open Ports & Services
Network reconnaissance data from Shodan. Open ports may indicate running services, misconfigurations, or potential attack surfaces.
| Port | Service | Risk | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 22 | SSH | Low | Secure Shell — common brute force target for remote access |
| 25 | SMTP | Medium | SMTP mail server — can be abused for spam relay |
| 53 | DNS | Low | DNS server — potential for DNS amplification attacks |
| 110 | POP3 | Low | Service on port 110 |
| 143 | IMAP | Low | Service on port 143 |
| 443 | HTTPS | Low | HTTPS web server — encrypted web traffic |
| 465 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 465 |
| 587 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 587 |
| 993 | IMAPS | Low | Service on port 993 |
| 995 | POP3S | Low | Service on port 995 |
| 2222 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 2222 |
| 8188 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 8188 |
| 20000 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 20000 |
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
173.212.229.68 has been assigned a threat score of 95/100 (Critical). This is a critical-level threat. Systems administrators should treat this IP as hostile and block all inbound connections without exception.
📊 Threat Analysis
The address 173.212.229.68 originates from Lauterbourg, France, operating on the network of Contabo GmbH. It was identified through automated analysis of incoming network traffic across monitored endpoints. During its 1-day observation window, we recorded 1 hostile requests from this IP — roughly 1 per day on average. Classified as a hosting IP, this address likely runs on a rented server or cloud instance. Attackers prefer datacenter IPs for their high bandwidth and disposable nature. Our records show 191 malicious IPs originating from France, positioning it as a significant contributor to global threat activity. At 95/100, this is an extremely high-risk address. All traffic should be considered hostile.
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
💡 WordPress-Specific Attack Vectors
WordPress sites face constant automated attacks targeting xmlrpc.php for brute force amplification, wp-login.php for credential theft, and vulnerable plugins for remote code execution. Over 90% of CMS-based attacks specifically target WordPress installations.
💡 IPv6 Scanning Challenges
The vast IPv6 address space makes traditional sequential scanning impractical. However, attackers use DNS records, certificate transparency logs, and predictable address patterns to identify active IPv6 hosts, adapting their techniques to the expanded address space.