
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 | |
| Danger medium hits: 2 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +20 |
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 196.51.38.75: 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8080 | HTTP-Alt | Low | HTTP alternative port — often used for admin panels or proxies |
| 8800 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 8800 |
| CVE ID | Link |
|---|---|
| CVE-2019-12519 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-18676 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12523 | NVD → |
| CVE-2018-19132 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-45802 | NVD → |
| CVE-2018-19131 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-24606 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-46847 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-59362 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-28652 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-28116 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12529 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-18677 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-13345 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-5824 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-8449 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-25097 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-46724 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-18860 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-8517 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-46846 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-49288 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12522 | NVD → |
| CVE-2026-33526 | NVD → |
| CVE-2026-33515 | 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 This volume strongly suggests severely outdated software.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.
196.51.38.75 has been assigned a threat score of 85/100 (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 196.51.38.75, geolocated to Tukwila, United States, operating on the network of DynaNode LLC, as a source of suspicious network activity. The address has been active for 9 days in our monitoring system, producing 2 flagged requests at a rate of ~0.2/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. Active path scanning has been detected — this IP probes for hundreds of common file and directory names. Our records show 198 malicious IPs originating from United States, positioning it as a significant contributor to global threat activity. The score of 85/100 indicates a confirmed malicious actor. Network-level blocking is appropriate.
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.
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.
CAPTCHAs remain a primary bot defense but face increasing bypass rates from AI-powered solvers. Modern alternatives include invisible behavioral analysis, proof-of-work challenges, and device fingerprinting that detect bots without impacting user experience.