
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Imported from old blocklist | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +0 | |
| UA bot: curl | Known bot/crawler User-Agent detected | +40 | |
| UA changed | Multiple User-Agents — bot rotation technique | +25 | |
| UA changed for same IP | Multiple User-Agents — bot rotation technique | +25 |
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 185.221.160.36: maintain blocklist of known malicious UA strings, require consistent UA across sessions, implement TLS fingerprinting.
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.
185.221.160.36 has been assigned a threat score of 65/100 (High). The IP is rated as a high-level threat. Network administrators should implement blocking rules and monitor for any connections from this address.
The following attack categories were identified:
Network traffic from 185.221.160.36, located in Moscow, Russia, operating on the network of First Server Limited, has been classified as malicious by our automated threat scoring engine. The address has been active for 101 days in our monitoring system, producing 872 flagged requests at a rate of ~8.6/day. 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. The IP exhibits User-Agent manipulation, switching between different browser identities or sending empty headers. Russia currently accounts for 110 blocked IPs in our database, making it a significant source of malicious traffic. The score of 65/100 warrants active monitoring and rate-limiting. Full blocking is advisable for sensitive systems.
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.
Examining HTTP headers beyond User-Agent reveals attack tools and automated scripts. Missing standard headers, unusual ordering, non-standard values, and inconsistencies with claimed client identity all serve as reliable detection signals.
Brute force attacks systematically try username and password combinations to gain unauthorized access. Modern attacks leverage credential databases from previous breaches, testing millions of combinations using distributed botnets across multiple IP addresses.