
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| 404 ratio 40-60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +15 | |
| Burst 12/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 13/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 14/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 41/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 42/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 43/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 46/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 47/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 48/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger medium hits: 258 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger medium hits: 261 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger medium hits: 262 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger strong hits: 44 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger strong hits: 60 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Probe 302→404 | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +20 | |
| UA suspicious | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +15 |
Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
IP 20.197.195.76 is enumerating directories. Configure fail2ban apache-404 jail after 10+ 404 errors. Disable directory listings. Normalize all 404 responses.
IP 20.197.195.76 is generating excessive traffic. Limit connections per source IP. Enable geographic blocking if traffic from this region is unexpected.
Address UA spoofing from 20.197.195.76: maintain blocklist of known malicious UA strings, require consistent UA across sessions, implement TLS fingerprinting.
Other blocked IPs from the same /24 subnet — indicates systematic abuse from this network range.
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.
20.197.195.76 has been assigned a threat score of 280/100 (Critical). This is a critical-level threat. Systems administrators should treat this IP as hostile and block all inbound connections without exception.
The following attack categories were identified:
Threat intelligence analysis has linked 20.197.195.76 to malicious activity originating from São Paulo, Brazil, operating on the network of Microsoft Corporation. The address has been under observation since its initial detection. Over a period of 4 days, this IP generated 955 malicious requests, averaging approximately 238.8 requests per 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. With 3 different attack patterns detected, this IP exhibits behavior characteristic of advanced automated scanning frameworks. Brazil currently accounts for 124 blocked IPs in our database, making it a significant source of malicious traffic. With a threat score of 280/100, this IP is among the most dangerous addresses in our database. Immediate and complete blocking is strongly recommended.
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.
Distributed denial of service attacks overwhelm infrastructure with traffic volume. Effective mitigation combines always-on traffic scrubbing, anycast network distribution, rate limiting, and the ability to quickly scale absorption capacity during attacks.
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.