
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Danger medium hits: 4 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +40 | |
| 404 ratio 40-60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +15 | |
| Probe pattern 302->404 same path | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +20 | |
| Foreign referer seen | Referer from unrelated external domain | +10 |
Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
Block scanning from 192.126.146.44: rate-limit 404 responses per IP, deploy a honeypot 404 page, ensure no backup files are web-accessible.
Network reconnaissance data from Shodan. Open ports may indicate running services, misconfigurations, or potential attack surfaces.
| Port | Service | Risk | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 80 | HTTP | Low | HTTP web server — standard web traffic |
| 1344 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 1344 |
| 3128 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 3128 |
| 8000 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 8000 |
| 8080 | HTTP-Alt | Low | HTTP alternative port — often used for admin panels or proxies |
| 8800 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 8800 |
| 52931 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 52931 |
| CVE ID | Link |
|---|---|
| CVE-2025-54574 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12519 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-62168 | NVD → |
| CVE-2022-41318 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-46784 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-11945 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12529 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12528 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-15049 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12523 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12526 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-25617 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-49288 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12520 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12524 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-18677 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-15810 | NVD → |
| CVE-2026-33515 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-28116 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-24606 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-31808 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-49285 | NVD → |
| CVE-2016-10003 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-25097 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-59362 | NVD → |
🔴 Security scanning identified 59 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 This volume strongly suggests severely outdated software.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.
192.126.146.44 has been assigned a threat score of 85/100 (Critical). A score this high marks a critical threat actor. This address has demonstrated persistent, aggressive malicious behavior across multiple detection vectors.
The following attack categories were identified:
IP address 192.126.146.44 has been traced to Seattle, United States, operating on the network of EliteWork LLC. Our threat detection systems have flagged this address based on observed malicious behavior patterns. The address has been active for 1 days in our monitoring system, producing 1 flagged requests at a rate of ~1/day. This residential IP is likely a compromised consumer device. Home routers and IoT equipment with default credentials are prime targets for botnet operators. Active path scanning has been detected — this IP probes for hundreds of common file and directory names. Our records show 138 malicious IPs originating from United States, positioning it as a significant contributor to global threat activity. A threat score of 85/100 places this IP in the high-risk category. Blocking at the firewall level is recommended.
This IP is classified as residential, suggesting it may belong to a compromised home device, IoT botnet member, or an infected personal computer. Residential IPs involved in attacks often indicate malware infection without the owner's knowledge.
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.
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.