IP Threat Report
198.46.209.6
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Directory Scan | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +0 |
Observed Activity
Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
Timeline
Recommendations
Actions taken & recommended
- IP 198.46.209.6 is blocked at application level (HTTP 403)
- Consider blocking at firewall level (iptables/CSF) to reduce server load
- Ensure sensitive files (.env, .git, backups) are not accessible from the web
⚙️ General Security
Add 198.46.209.6 to your firewall blocklist. Review logs for successful connections. Enable comprehensive logging on all public-facing services.
Blacklist Status (DNSBL)
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.
Threat Analysis
198.46.209.6 has been assigned a threat score of 85/100 (Critical). A score this high marks a critical threat actor. This address has demonstrated persistent, aggressive malicious behavior across multiple detection vectors.
📊 Threat Analysis
IP address 198.46.209.6 has been traced to Buffalo, United States, operating on the network of HostPapa. Our threat detection systems have flagged this address based on observed malicious behavior patterns. Over a period of 4 days, this IP generated 574 malicious requests, averaging approximately 143.5 requests per day. Our records show 101 malicious IPs originating from United States, positioning it as a significant contributor to global threat activity. At 85/100, this IP warrants immediate defensive action.
Related Threats
🇺🇸 Top threats from United States
104.28.246.115 (350)103.215.74.213 (340)103.168.66.237 (340)34.187.158.4 (340)34.186.187.208 (340)View all →Security Intelligence
💡 False Positive Management
False positives erode trust in security systems and waste analyst resources. Effective management requires feedback loops, allowlisting mechanisms, contextual analysis, and regular tuning of detection rules based on operational experience.
💡 User-Agent Analysis Techniques
Analyzing User-Agent strings reveals automated tools masquerading as legitimate browsers. Inconsistencies between claimed browser capabilities and actual behavior, impossible version combinations, and known scanner signatures help identify malicious clients.