
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.
Block scanning from 196.51.56.231: 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 |
| 3128 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 3128 |
| 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-2025-62168 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12523 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12519 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-31807 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-8449 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12524 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12520 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-59362 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-18676 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-18860 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12529 | NVD → |
| CVE-2018-19131 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-31806 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-8517 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-18678 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-46847 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-49286 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-28116 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-15049 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-31808 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-46784 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-15811 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12522 | NVD → |
| CVE-2018-1000027 | NVD → |
| CVE-2018-1000024 | 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 This volume strongly suggests severely outdated software.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.
196.51.56.231 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:
Our monitoring infrastructure has identified 196.51.56.231, geolocated to Tukwila, United States, operating on the network of DynaNode LLC, as a source of suspicious network activity. Our sensors captured 2 malicious requests from this address across a 1-day span, reflecting a sustained attack cadence of ~2 requests per day. Operating from datacenter infrastructure, this IP is typical of addresses used in organized attack operations. Cloud and VPS providers are commonly exploited as launching platforms for automated scanning. Active path scanning has been detected — this IP probes for hundreds of common file and directory names. United States currently accounts for 198 blocked IPs in our database, making it a significant source of malicious traffic. A score of 105/100 places this address in the top tier of severity. Block and investigate any historical connections.
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.
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.
Digital forensics preserves and analyzes electronic evidence following attacks. Proper chain of custody, forensic imaging, timeline reconstruction, and artifact analysis are essential for understanding attack scope, attribution, and preventing recurrence.