IP Threat Report
31.171.130.143
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Directory Scan | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +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
Recommendations
Actions taken & recommended
- IP 31.171.130.143 is blocked at application level (HTTP 403)
- Consider blocking at firewall level (iptables/CSF) to reduce server load
- Other malicious IPs detected in the same /24 subnet — consider blocking 31.171.130.0/24
- Ensure sensitive files (.env, .git, backups) are not accessible from the web
⚙️ Defensive Recommendations
Block 31.171.130.143 at the network perimeter. Implement defense-in-depth combining IP blocking with application-layer protections.
Neighbors in 31.171.130.0/24
Other blocked IPs from the same /24 subnet — indicates systematic abuse from this network range.
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
31.171.130.143 has been assigned a threat score of 60/100 (High). The IP is rated as a high-level threat. Network administrators should implement blocking rules and monitor for any connections from this address.
📊 Threat Analysis
31.171.130.143 is registered in Slough, United Kingdom, operating on the network of F.N.S. HOLDINGS LIMITED. This IP first appeared in our threat feeds after triggering multiple behavioral detection signatures. During its 1-day observation window, we recorded 41 hostile requests from this IP — roughly 41 per day on average. United Kingdom currently accounts for 151 blocked IPs in our database, making it a significant source of malicious traffic. The score of 60/100 warrants active monitoring and rate-limiting. Full blocking is advisable for sensitive systems.
Related Threats
🇬🇧 Top threats from United Kingdom
104.28.208.60 (340)104.28.240.60 (340)91.230.225.239 (305)91.230.225.36 (305)91.230.225.147 (305)View all →Security Intelligence
💡 Automated Incident Response
Automated response systems can block threats in milliseconds, far faster than human analysts. However, automation requires careful safeguards — rate limits on blocking actions, automatic expiration, and human review queues prevent automated systems from causing self-inflicted outages.
💡 Threat Score Calculation Methods
Threat scoring combines multiple signals — request patterns, known signatures, IP reputation, geographic risk, and behavioral analysis — into a single actionable metric. Weighted scoring models allow tuning sensitivity to balance security with usability.