
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Burst: 20 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 21 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Foreign referer seen | Referer from unrelated external domain | +10 |
Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
Implement limit_req_zone in nginx. Deploy CDN with DDoS protection. Configure SYN cookies and connection tracking to throttle 212.34.140.194.
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.
212.34.140.194 has been assigned a threat score of 80/100 (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 intelligence analysis has linked 212.34.140.194 to malicious activity originating from Amsterdam, Netherlands, operating on the network of Servers Tech Fzco. The address has been under observation since its initial detection. During its 1-day observation window, we recorded 1 hostile requests from this IP — roughly 1 per day on average. 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. Rate-based attacks from this IP aim to overwhelm server resources through high-volume request flooding. Netherlands currently accounts for 178 blocked IPs in our database, making it a significant source of malicious traffic. A threat score of 80/100 places this IP in the high-risk category. Blocking at the firewall level is 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.
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.
WAFs inspect HTTP traffic to block common attacks but require careful tuning. Overly aggressive rules cause false positives while permissive configurations miss attacks. Modern WAFs combine signature matching with behavioral analysis and machine learning.