IP Threat Report
209.127.142.16
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Burst 5/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Foreign referer | Referer from unrelated external domain | +10 | |
| POST seen | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +8 | |
| UA changed | Multiple User-Agents — bot rotation technique | +25 | |
| UA suspicious | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +15 | |
| spam:no_js_check | Spam/malware keywords in request content | +0 |
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
We have detected 461 malicious IPs from this autonomous system.
Recommendations
Actions taken & recommended
- IP 209.127.142.16 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
🌊 Flood / DDoS Mitigation
Implement limit_req_zone in nginx. Deploy CDN with DDoS protection. Configure SYN cookies and connection tracking to throttle 209.127.142.16.
🤖 Bot Detection
Address UA spoofing from 209.127.142.16: maintain blocklist of known malicious UA strings, require consistent UA across sessions, implement TLS fingerprinting.
📧 Spam Protection
Enable CAPTCHA on all public forms. Add honeypot fields. Rate-limit submissions to 3 per minute per IP. Deploy Akismet or CleanTalk.
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
209.127.142.16 has been assigned a threat score of 100/100 (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:
📊 Threat Analysis
209.127.142.16 is registered in Montreal, Canada, operating on the network of B2 Net Solutions Inc.. This IP first appeared in our threat feeds after triggering multiple behavioral detection signatures. Our sensors captured 471 malicious requests from this address across a 13-day span, reflecting a sustained attack cadence of ~36.2 requests per day. Classified as a hosting IP, this address likely runs on a rented server or cloud instance. Attackers prefer datacenter IPs for their high bandwidth and disposable nature. The dual attack vectors of Request Flooding combined with User-Agent Anomaly indicate a coordinated assault rather than opportunistic scanning. Canada currently accounts for 2,612 blocked IPs in our database, making it a major source of malicious traffic. A score of 100/100 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
🇨🇦 Top threats from Canada
20.151.200.44 (315)20.151.179.130 (308)20.151.111.128 (308)45.91.23.64 (305)45.91.23.164 (305)View all →🏢 Same network: AS55286
209.127.35.3 (215)198.245.73.112 (165)198.20.175.209 (165)198.245.71.120 (165)23.236.157.73 (165)View all →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.