
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Danger medium hits: 6 | 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 | |
| Danger medium hits: 8 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 |
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 192.241.65.231: rate-limit 404 responses per IP, deploy a honeypot 404 page, ensure no backup files are web-accessible.
Other blocked IPs from the same /24 subnet — indicates systematic abuse from this network range.
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 |
| 21242 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 21242 |
| 52931 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 52931 |
| CVE ID | Link |
|---|---|
| CVE-2023-49288 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-28116 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12526 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12519 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-14058 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-8449 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-59362 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-15049 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12523 | NVD → |
| CVE-2018-1000027 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12524 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-33620 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-49286 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-25617 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-62168 | NVD → |
| CVE-2018-19132 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-18860 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-54574 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-28651 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-49285 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-46784 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-31806 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-15811 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-15810 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-46847 | 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 This volume strongly suggests severely outdated software.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.
192.241.65.231 has been assigned a threat score of 105/100 (Critical). This places it in the critical threat category. Immediate blocking is strongly advised across all network perimeters.
The following attack categories were identified:
Our monitoring infrastructure has identified 192.241.65.231, geolocated to Buffalo, United States, operating on the network of B2 Net Solutions Inc., as a source of suspicious network activity. Our sensors captured 11 malicious requests from this address across a 24-day span, reflecting a sustained attack cadence of ~0.5 requests per day. This residential IP is likely a compromised consumer device. Home routers and IoT equipment with default credentials are prime targets for botnet operators. The IP exhibits directory enumeration behavior, systematically requesting non-existent paths to discover hidden files and misconfigured resources. Our records show 180 malicious IPs originating from United States, positioning it as a significant contributor to global threat activity. With a threat score of 105/100, this IP is among the most dangerous addresses in our database. Immediate and complete blocking is strongly 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.
Request smuggling exploits differences in how front-end and back-end servers parse HTTP requests. This technique can bypass security controls, poison web caches, and hijack other users sessions by desynchronizing request boundaries.
Standards like STIX/TAXII, MISP, and OpenIOC enable automated sharing of threat intelligence between organizations. Collective defense through shared indicators, tactics, and procedures strengthens the entire security community against common threats.