
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| 404 ratio 40-60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +15 | |
| 404 ratio >= 60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +25 | |
| Burst 21/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 23/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 24/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 68/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 73/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 85/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 88/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger medium hits: 141 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger medium hits: 281 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger medium hits: 291 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger medium hits: 422 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger strong hits: 17 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger strong hits: 40 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger strong hits: 43 | 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 20.220.217.32 is enumerating directories. Configure fail2ban apache-404 jail after 10+ 404 errors. Disable directory listings. Normalize all 404 responses.
Implement limit_req_zone in nginx. Deploy CDN with DDoS protection. Configure SYN cookies and connection tracking to throttle 20.220.217.32.
Address UA spoofing from 20.220.217.32: maintain blocklist of known malicious UA strings, require consistent UA across sessions, implement TLS fingerprinting.
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.
20.220.217.32 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:
Our monitoring infrastructure has identified 20.220.217.32, geolocated to Toronto, Canada, operating on the network of Microsoft Corporation, as a source of suspicious network activity. Over a period of 3 days, this IP generated 404 malicious requests, averaging approximately 134.7 requests per day. This address belongs to a datacenter or cloud hosting provider. Hosting IPs are frequently leveraged by threat actors who rent cheap VPS instances specifically for conducting attacks. The combination of 3 distinct attack vectors indicates a sophisticated, multi-pronged threat actor deploying automated tools that probe multiple attack surfaces simultaneously. With 103 flagged addresses, Canada 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.
Automated response systems can block threats in milliseconds, far faster than human analysts. However, automation requires careful safeguards — rate limits on blocking actions, automatic expiration, and human review queues prevent automated systems from causing self-inflicted outages.