IP Threat Report
31.133.0.210
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Form 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
Recommendations
Actions taken & recommended
- IP 31.133.0.210 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
📧 Content Abuse Prevention
IP 31.133.0.210 is flooding forms with spam. Implement time-based tokens and block IPs submitting more than 5 forms per hour.
Open Ports & Services
Network reconnaissance data from Shodan. Open ports may indicate running services, misconfigurations, or potential attack surfaces.
| Port | Service | Risk | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 22 | SSH | Low | Secure Shell — common brute force target for remote access |
| 80 | HTTP | Low | HTTP web server — standard web traffic |
| 8443 | HTTPS-Alt | Low | Service on port 8443 |
| 10000 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 10000 |
| CVE ID | Link |
|---|---|
| CVE-2009-2299 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-38709 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-49630 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-38474 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-43394 | NVD → |
| CVE-2013-0941 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-38477 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-47252 | NVD → |
| CVE-2013-0942 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-27316 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-49812 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-55753 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-38473 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-38475 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-24795 | NVD → |
| CVE-2025-65082 | NVD → |
| CVE-2012-4001 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-38472 | NVD → |
| CVE-2011-1176 | NVD → |
| CVE-2024-36387 | NVD → |
| CVE-2013-2765 | NVD → |
| CVE-2013-4365 | NVD → |
| CVE-2012-4360 | NVD → |
| CVE-2009-0796 | NVD → |
| CVE-2007-4723 | NVD → |
🔴 This host has 37 known CVEs associated with its exposed services. This volume strongly suggests severely outdated software. Review each CVE in the NVD database.
Data source: Shodan InternetDB. Scanned independently of abuse.mom.
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
31.133.0.210 has been assigned a threat score of 70/100 (High). This score indicates high threat severity. The IP has shown clear patterns of malicious behavior that warrant immediate defensive measures.
📊 Threat Analysis
The address 31.133.0.210 originates from Poznan, Poland, operating on the network of Hosteam S.c. Tomasz Groszewski Bartosz Waszak Lukasz Groszewski. It was identified through automated analysis of incoming network traffic across monitored endpoints. Over a period of 1 days, this IP generated 1 malicious requests, averaging approximately 1 requests per day. This is a residential IP address, suggesting a compromised home device such as a router, smart appliance, or infected workstation participating in a botnet. Poland currently accounts for 101 blocked IPs in our database, making it a significant source of malicious traffic. A threat score of 70/100 places this IP in the high-risk category. Blocking at the firewall level is recommended.
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.
Related Threats
🇵🇱 Top threats from Poland
170.168.175.156 (313)170.168.96.250 (313)170.168.175.34 (313)74.248.132.176 (280)74.248.96.218 (280)View all →🏢 Same network: AS51290
View all →Security Intelligence
💡 SQL Injection Campaigns
SQL injection remains one of the most common web attack vectors. Attackers inject malicious SQL code through input fields to extract database contents, modify data, or gain administrative access. Automated scanners test for SQLi vulnerabilities at massive scale.
💡 Web Application Firewall Strategies
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.