IP Threat Report
20.63.42.26
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| 404 ratio 40-60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +15 | |
| Burst 21/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 22/2s | 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 64/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 74/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 80/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 86/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 87/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger medium hits: 279 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger medium hits: 419 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger strong hits: 34 | 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 |
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
Network Provider
Recommendations
Actions taken & recommended
- IP 20.63.42.26 is blocked at application level (HTTP 403)
- Consider blocking at firewall level (iptables/CSF) to reduce server load
- Report abuse to the network provider via their abuse contact
- Ensure sensitive files (.env, .git, backups) are not accessible from the web
🔎 Directory Scan Defense
IP 20.63.42.26 is enumerating directories. Configure fail2ban apache-404 jail after 10+ 404 errors. Disable directory listings. Normalize all 404 responses.
🌊 Traffic Flood Defense
IP 20.63.42.26 is generating excessive traffic. Limit connections per source IP. Enable geographic blocking if traffic from this region is unexpected.
🤖 Bot Detection
Address UA spoofing from 20.63.42.26: maintain blocklist of known malicious UA strings, require consistent UA across sessions, implement TLS fingerprinting.
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
20.63.42.26 has been assigned a threat score of 280/100 (Critical). This places it in the critical threat category. Immediate blocking is strongly advised across all network perimeters.
The following attack categories were identified:
📊 Threat Analysis
Our monitoring infrastructure has identified 20.63.42.26, geolocated to Toronto, Canada, operating on the network of Microsoft Corporation, as a source of suspicious network activity. During its 6-day observation window, we recorded 1,201 hostile requests from this IP — roughly 200.2 per day on average. 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. The diversity of 3 separate attack methods suggests a comprehensive attack toolkit — likely an automated scanner that tests for vulnerabilities across multiple categories. Our records show 103 malicious IPs originating from Canada, positioning it as a significant contributor to global threat activity. At 280/100, this is an extremely high-risk address. All traffic should be considered hostile.
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.
Related Threats
Security Intelligence
💡 DDoS Mitigation Approaches
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.
💡 Bulletproof Hosting Ecosystem
Bulletproof hosting providers deliberately ignore abuse complaints, creating safe havens for malicious operations. These providers often operate in jurisdictions with weak cybercrime enforcement, offering services specifically marketed to criminal organizations.