
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| 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 | |
| POST requests present | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +8 |
Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
Add 176.29.249.183 to your firewall blocklist. Review logs for successful connections. Enable comprehensive logging on all public-facing services.
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.
176.29.249.183 has been assigned a threat score of 103/100 (Critical). With this rating, the IP falls into the critical severity bracket — among the most dangerous addresses in our monitoring database.
Our monitoring infrastructure has identified 176.29.249.183, geolocated to Amman, JO, operating on the network of ZAIN, as a source of suspicious network activity. Over a period of 1 days, this IP generated 1 malicious requests, averaging approximately 1 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. JO currently accounts for 78 blocked IPs in our database, making it a notable source of malicious traffic. With a threat score of 103/100, this IP is among the most dangerous addresses in our database. Immediate and complete blocking is strongly recommended.
Insecure file upload functionality allows attackers to upload web shells, malware, or scripts that execute on the server. Proper validation must check file content, not just extensions, and uploaded files should be stored outside the web root.
When multiple IPs in a subnet show malicious behavior, subnet blocking efficiently neutralizes the threat. However, overly broad blocking risks impacting legitimate users. Analysis of subnet ownership and historical behavior guides appropriate blocking scope.