
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: 5 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +50 |
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 196.51.68.110: 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-2016-10003 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-45802 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12521 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-24606 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-46728 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-18679 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-5824 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-31806 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12529 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-33620 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12528 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12520 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-46784 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-15049 | NVD → |
| CVE-2018-1000024 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-50269 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-46846 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-62168 | NVD → |
| CVE-2020-11945 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-13345 | NVD → |
| CVE-2019-12525 | NVD → |
| CVE-2021-31808 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-46724 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-46847 | NVD → |
| CVE-2016-10002 | NVD → |
🔴 This host has 56 known CVEs associated with its exposed services. This volume strongly suggests severely outdated software. Review each CVE in the NVD database.
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.
196.51.68.110 has been assigned a threat score of 95/100 (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:
The address 196.51.68.110 originates from Tukwila, United States, operating on the network of DynaNode LLC. It was identified through automated analysis of incoming network traffic across monitored endpoints. The address has been active for 6 days in our monitoring system, producing 2 flagged requests at a rate of ~0.3/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. The IP exhibits directory enumeration behavior, systematically requesting non-existent paths to discover hidden files and misconfigured resources. With 198 flagged addresses, United States represents a significant presence in our threat database. At 95/100, this is an extremely high-risk address. All traffic should be considered hostile.
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.
Modern attacks increasingly target APIs rather than traditional web interfaces. Attackers enumerate endpoints, test for broken authentication, and exploit excessive data exposure. API attacks are harder to detect as they mimic legitimate programmatic access patterns.
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.