
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Form spam: no_js_check | Spam/malware keywords in request content | +0 |
Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
IP 178.20.31.81 is flooding forms with spam. Implement time-based tokens and block IPs submitting more than 5 forms per hour.
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.
178.20.31.81 has been assigned a threat score of 70/100 (High). At this threat level, the IP is considered high risk. Firewall rules should be updated to deny traffic from this source.
178.20.31.81 is registered in Amsterdam, Netherlands, operating on the network of Alex Largman. This IP first appeared in our threat feeds after triggering multiple behavioral detection signatures. During its 1-day observation window, we recorded 1 hostile requests from this IP — roughly 1 per day on average. 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. With 35 flagged addresses, Netherlands represents a notable presence in our threat database. A threat score of 70/100 places this IP in the high-risk category. Blocking at the firewall level is 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.
SQL injection remains one of the most common web attack vectors. Attackers inject malicious SQL code through input fields to extract database contents, modify data, or gain administrative access. Automated scanners test for SQLi vulnerabilities at massive scale.
Digital forensics preserves and analyzes electronic evidence following attacks. Proper chain of custody, forensic imaging, timeline reconstruction, and artifact analysis are essential for understanding attack scope, attribution, and preventing recurrence.