IP Threat Report
31.22.104.128
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Danger strong hits: 4 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| 404 ratio 40-60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +15 | |
| Probe pattern 302->404 same path | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +20 | |
| Imported from old blocklist | 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
Network Provider
Recommendations
Actions taken & recommended
- IP 31.22.104.128 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
🔎 Path Enumeration Protection
Block scanning from 31.22.104.128: rate-limit 404 responses per IP, deploy a honeypot 404 page, ensure no backup files are web-accessible.
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 |
| 5353 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 5353 |
| 8888 | HTTP-Alt | Low | Service on port 8888 |
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
31.22.104.128 has been assigned a threat score of 135/100 (Critical). This represents a critical risk level. Our detection systems have flagged multiple high-confidence indicators of malicious intent from this address.
The following attack categories were identified:
📊 Threat Analysis
31.22.104.128 is registered in Toronto, Canada, operating on the network of DataCrunch Oy. This IP first appeared in our threat feeds after triggering multiple behavioral detection signatures. Our sensors captured 3 malicious requests from this address across a 1-day span, reflecting a sustained attack cadence of ~3 requests per day. The IP is classified as hosting/datacenter infrastructure, commonly associated with rented servers used for automated attack campaigns, botnet command-and-control, or vulnerability scanning at scale. The IP exhibits directory enumeration behavior, systematically requesting non-existent paths to discover hidden files and misconfigured resources. Our records show 101 malicious IPs originating from Canada, positioning it as a significant contributor to global threat activity. A score of 135/100 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
45.91.23.64 (305)147.15.149.40 (300)148.116.72.171 (300)89.251.0.24 (295)89.251.0.128 (295)View all →🏢 Same network: AS198020
View all →Security Intelligence
💡 HTTP Request Smuggling
Request smuggling exploits differences in how front-end and back-end servers parse HTTP requests. This technique can bypass security controls, poison web caches, and hijack other users sessions by desynchronizing request boundaries.
💡 GraphQL Security Risks
GraphQL APIs introduce specific vulnerabilities including introspection information disclosure, query complexity attacks, batching abuse, and authorization bypass through nested queries. Depth limiting, cost analysis, and field-level authorization address these GraphQL-specific threats.