
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Danger strong hits: 19 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger medium hits: 39 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| 404 ratio >= 60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +25 | |
| Burst: 23 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 52 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 24 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger strong hits: 18 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger medium hits: 47 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Burst: 57 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger medium hits: 52 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Burst: 66 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger strong hits: 23 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger medium hits: 46 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger strong hits: 13 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger medium hits: 61 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger strong hits: 17 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger strong hits: 20 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger medium hits: 59 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 |
Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
IP 20.242.98.225 is enumerating directories. Configure fail2ban apache-404 jail after 10+ 404 errors. Disable directory listings. Normalize all 404 responses.
IP 20.242.98.225 is generating excessive traffic. Limit connections per source IP. Enable geographic blocking if traffic from this region is unexpected.
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.
20.242.98.225 has been assigned a threat score of 255/100 (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:
20.242.98.225 is registered in Boydton, United States, operating on the network of Microsoft Corporation. This IP first appeared in our threat feeds after triggering multiple behavioral detection signatures. During its 1-day observation window, we recorded 26 hostile requests from this IP — roughly 26 per day on average. 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. Two attack patterns were identified (Path Enumeration and Request Flooding), suggesting a semi-automated campaign that targets multiple vulnerabilities. Our records show 101 malicious IPs originating from United States, positioning it as a significant contributor to global threat activity. With a threat score of 255/100, 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.
SSRF attacks trick servers into making requests to internal resources that should not be publicly accessible. This can expose cloud metadata endpoints, internal APIs, and private network services, potentially leading to full infrastructure compromise.
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.