
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| 404 ratio 40-60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +15 | |
| Burst 42/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 62/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 62/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 78/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 93/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 95/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 50 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 51 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 84 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger strong hits: 12 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger strong hits: 18 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger strong hits: 66 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Foreign referer | Referer from unrelated external domain | +10 | |
| Foreign referer seen | Referer from unrelated external domain | +10 | |
| UA changed | Multiple User-Agents — bot rotation technique | +25 | |
| UA changed for same IP | Multiple User-Agents — bot rotation technique | +25 |
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 208.84.100.28: rate-limit 404 responses per IP, deploy a honeypot 404 page, ensure no backup files are web-accessible.
IP 208.84.100.28 is generating excessive traffic. Limit connections per source IP. Enable geographic blocking if traffic from this region is unexpected.
IP 208.84.100.28 shows suspicious UA behavior. Block empty User-Agent requests. Implement JavaScript-based bot detection for sensitive endpoints.
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.
208.84.100.28 has been assigned a threat score of 220/100 (Critical). A score this high marks a critical threat actor. This address has demonstrated persistent, aggressive malicious behavior across multiple detection vectors.
The following attack categories were identified:
Threat intelligence analysis has linked 208.84.100.28 to malicious activity originating from Kalispell, United States, operating on the network of Fro LLC. The address has been under observation since its initial detection. Our sensors captured 657 malicious requests from this address across a 13-day span, reflecting a sustained attack cadence of ~50.5 requests per day. Operating from a residential network, this IP may represent a compromised home gateway or IoT device that has been drafted into a larger attack infrastructure. The diversity of 3 separate attack methods suggests a comprehensive attack toolkit — likely an automated scanner that tests for vulnerabilities across multiple categories. With 175 flagged addresses, United States represents a significant presence in our threat database. A score of 220/100 places this address in the top tier of severity. Block and investigate any historical connections.
This IP is classified as residential, suggesting it may belong to a compromised home device, IoT botnet member, or an infected personal computer. Residential IPs involved in attacks often indicate malware infection without the owner's knowledge.
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.
Blocking traffic from specific countries reduces attack surface but impacts legitimate international users. Effective geo-based policies use tiered approaches — blocking, rate limiting, or requiring additional verification based on risk assessment.