
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Danger medium hits: 8 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| 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.
IP 192.126.240.240 is enumerating directories. Configure fail2ban apache-404 jail after 10+ 404 errors. Disable directory listings. Normalize all 404 responses.
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 |
| 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 |
| CVE ID | Link |
|---|---|
| CVE-2021-33620 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-28116 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-25097 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-62168 | NVD → |
| CVE-2018-19131 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-15049 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-31807 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12520 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-5824 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-49285 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12525 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-8517 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-54574 | NVD → |
| CVE-2016-10003 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12523 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-31806 | NVD → |
| CVE-2018-1000027 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-46784 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12519 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-18860 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-18677 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12522 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-28652 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12528 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12526 | NVD → |
🔴 Security scanning identified 56 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 This volume strongly suggests severely outdated software.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.
192.126.240.240 has been assigned a threat score of 105/100 (Critical). With this rating, the IP falls into the critical severity bracket — among the most dangerous addresses in our monitoring database.
The following attack categories were identified:
IP address 192.126.240.240 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. Over a period of 1 days, this IP generated 1 malicious requests, averaging approximately 1 requests per day. The address is classified as residential, meaning it likely belongs to an end-user ISP connection. Malicious activity from residential IPs typically indicates device compromise or botnet membership. Active path scanning has been detected — this IP probes for hundreds of common file and directory names. With 138 flagged addresses, United States represents a significant presence in our threat database. A score of 105/100 places this address in the top tier of severity. Block and investigate any historical connections.
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.
Prototype pollution manipulates JavaScript object prototypes to inject properties that affect all objects in an application. This can lead to denial of service, property injection, and in some cases remote code execution in Node.js applications.
Tor exit nodes are publicly listed but constantly rotating. While Tor serves essential privacy functions for journalists and activists, it is also used to anonymize attacks. Effective security policies differentiate between blocking and monitoring Tor traffic.