IP Threat Report
20.63.86.26
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 24/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 68/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 86/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger medium hits: 291 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger strong hits: 40 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger strong hits: 51 | 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 20.63.86.26 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
🔎 Path Enumeration Protection
Block scanning from 20.63.86.26: rate-limit 404 responses per IP, deploy a honeypot 404 page, ensure no backup files are web-accessible.
🌊 Flood / DDoS Mitigation
Implement limit_req_zone in nginx. Deploy CDN with DDoS protection. Configure SYN cookies and connection tracking to throttle 20.63.86.26.
🤖 User-Agent Anomaly Defense
IP 20.63.86.26 shows suspicious UA behavior. Block empty User-Agent requests. Implement JavaScript-based bot detection for sensitive endpoints.
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
20.63.86.26 has been assigned a threat score of 280/100 (Critical). This represents a critical risk level. Our detection systems have flagged multiple high-confidence indicators of malicious intent from this address.
The following attack categories were identified:
📊 Threat Analysis
Our monitoring infrastructure has identified 20.63.86.26, geolocated to Toronto, Canada, operating on the network of Microsoft Corporation, as a source of suspicious network activity. The address has been active for 6 days in our monitoring system, producing 429 flagged requests at a rate of ~71.5/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. With 3 different attack patterns detected, this IP exhibits behavior characteristic of advanced automated scanning frameworks. Our records show 101 malicious IPs originating from Canada, positioning it as a significant contributor to global threat activity. A score of 280/100 places this address in the top tier of severity. Block and investigate any historical connections.
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.
💡 TLS Certificate Misconfigurations
Expired, self-signed, or misconfigured TLS certificates create security vulnerabilities and trust issues. Certificate monitoring, automated renewal through ACME protocols, and proper certificate chain configuration prevent both security gaps and service disruptions.