
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| UA bot: curl | Known bot/crawler User-Agent detected | +40 | |
| UA changed for same IP | Multiple User-Agents — bot rotation technique | +25 | |
| 404 ratio 40-60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +15 | |
| Burst: 5 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 10 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Imported from old blocklist | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +0 |
Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
Address UA spoofing from 185.180.230.193: maintain blocklist of known malicious UA strings, require consistent UA across sessions, implement TLS fingerprinting.
Block scanning from 185.180.230.193: rate-limit 404 responses per IP, deploy a honeypot 404 page, ensure no backup files are web-accessible.
Implement limit_req_zone in nginx. Deploy CDN with DDoS protection. Configure SYN cookies and connection tracking to throttle 185.180.230.193.
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 |
| CVE ID | Link |
|---|---|
| CVE-2020-15778 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-32728 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-6109 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-36368 | NVD → |
| CVE-2008-3844 | NVD → |
| CVE-2016-20012 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-48795 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-6111 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-41617 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-51767 | NVD → |
| CVE-2018-15473 | NVD → |
| CVE-2007-2768 | NVD → |
| CVE-2018-15919 | NVD → |
| CVE-2017-15906 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-26465 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-51385 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-14145 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-38408 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-6110 | NVD → |
| CVE-2018-20685 | NVD → |
🔴 Security scanning identified 20 vulnerability entries on this host. This volume strongly suggests severely outdated software. Consult NVD advisories for details.
Data source: Shodan InternetDB. Scanned independently of abuse.mom.
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.
185.180.230.193 has been assigned a threat score of 150/100 (Critical). This places it in the critical threat category. Immediate blocking is strongly advised across all network perimeters.
The following attack categories were identified:
IP address 185.180.230.193 has been traced to Moscow, Russia, operating on the network of First Server Limited. Our threat detection systems have flagged this address based on observed malicious behavior patterns. Our sensors captured 4 malicious requests from this address across a 24-day span, reflecting a sustained attack cadence of ~0.2 requests per day. The IP is classified as hosting/datacenter infrastructure, commonly associated with rented servers used for automated attack campaigns, botnet command-and-control, or vulnerability scanning at scale. The combination of 3 distinct attack vectors indicates a sophisticated, multi-pronged threat actor deploying automated tools that probe multiple attack surfaces simultaneously. Russia currently accounts for 107 blocked IPs in our database, making it a significant source of malicious traffic. At 150/100, 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.
TLS fingerprinting creates unique identifiers based on how clients negotiate encrypted connections. The JA3 and JA4 methods generate hashes from TLS ClientHello parameters, enabling identification of specific tools and malware regardless of IP address changes.
False positives erode trust in security systems and waste analyst resources. Effective management requires feedback loops, allowlisting mechanisms, contextual analysis, and regular tuning of detection rules based on operational experience.