
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Burst: 5 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Foreign referer | Referer from unrelated external domain | +10 | |
| Foreign referer seen | Referer from unrelated external domain | +10 | |
| Form spam: no_js_check | Spam/malware keywords in request content | +0 |
Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
IP 31.133.32.102 is generating excessive traffic. Limit connections per source IP. Enable geographic blocking if traffic from this region is unexpected.
Enable CAPTCHA on all public forms. Add honeypot fields. Rate-limit submissions to 3 per minute per IP. Deploy Akismet or CleanTalk.
Network reconnaissance data from Shodan. Open ports may indicate running services, misconfigurations, or potential attack surfaces.
| Port | Service | Risk | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 21 | FTP | Medium | File Transfer Protocol — often targeted for anonymous login attacks |
| 53 | DNS | Low | DNS server — potential for DNS amplification attacks |
| 500 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 500 |
| 1701 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 1701 |
| 3128 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 3128 |
| 4080 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 4080 |
| 4081 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 4081 |
| 9080 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 9080 |
⚠️ Network scanning reveals 1 dangerous service exposed on 31.133.32.102. These services should not be publicly accessible without strict firewall rules.
Data source: Shodan InternetDB. Scanned independently of abuse.mom.
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.
31.133.32.102 has been assigned a threat score of 70/100 (High). This classifies it as a high-severity threat. Proactive blocking is recommended for sensitive infrastructure.
The following attack categories were identified:
Our monitoring infrastructure has identified 31.133.32.102, geolocated to Rostov-on-Don, Russia, operating on the network of S.U.E. DPR Republic Operator of Networks, as a source of suspicious network activity. Our sensors captured 230 malicious requests from this address across a 73-day span, reflecting a sustained attack cadence of ~3.2 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 IP is engaged in request flooding, sending traffic at rates designed to exhaust server capacity. With 101 flagged addresses, Russia represents a significant presence in our threat database. The score of 70/100 indicates a confirmed malicious actor. Network-level blocking is appropriate.
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.
Digital forensics preserves and analyzes electronic evidence following attacks. Proper chain of custody, forensic imaging, timeline reconstruction, and artifact analysis are essential for understanding attack scope, attribution, and preventing recurrence.
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.