
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| 404 ratio 40-60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +15 | |
| Burst 11/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 12/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 39/10s | 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 44/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger medium hits: 224 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger medium hits: 226 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger medium hits: 336 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger medium hits: 72 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger strong hits: 18 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger strong hits: 24 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger strong hits: 33 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger strong hits: 6 | 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.
Block scanning from 20.214.136.39: rate-limit 404 responses per IP, deploy a honeypot 404 page, ensure no backup files are web-accessible.
Implement limit_req_zone in nginx. Deploy CDN with DDoS protection. Configure SYN cookies and connection tracking to throttle 20.214.136.39.
Address UA spoofing from 20.214.136.39: 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.
20.214.136.39 has been assigned a threat score of 280/100 (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:
Network traffic from 20.214.136.39, located in Seoul, South Korea, operating on the network of Microsoft Corporation, has been classified as malicious by our automated threat scoring engine. Our sensors captured 275 malicious requests from this address across a 7-day span, reflecting a sustained attack cadence of ~39.3 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. The combination of 3 distinct attack vectors indicates a sophisticated, multi-pronged threat actor deploying automated tools that probe multiple attack surfaces simultaneously. With 102 flagged addresses, South Korea represents a significant presence in our threat database. 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.
Botnet C2 infrastructure has evolved from centralized IRC channels to resilient peer-to-peer networks, domain generation algorithms, and blockchain-based communication. This evolution makes botnet takedowns increasingly difficult and expensive.