IP Threat Report
34.32.225.205
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| 404 ratio 40-60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +15 | |
| 404 ratio >= 60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +25 | |
| Burst 125/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 140/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 200/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 200/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 96/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger medium hits: 12 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger medium hits: 14 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger medium hits: 20 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger strong hits: 203 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger strong hits: 248 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger strong hits: 51 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger strong hits: 97 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Foreign referer | Referer from unrelated external domain | +10 | |
| POST seen | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +8 | |
| UA changed | Multiple User-Agents — bot rotation technique | +25 |
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 34.32.225.205 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
🔎 Directory Scan Defense
IP 34.32.225.205 is enumerating directories. Configure fail2ban apache-404 jail after 10+ 404 errors. Disable directory listings. Normalize all 404 responses.
🌊 Flood / DDoS Mitigation
Implement limit_req_zone in nginx. Deploy CDN with DDoS protection. Configure SYN cookies and connection tracking to throttle 34.32.225.205.
🤖 User-Agent Anomaly Defense
IP 34.32.225.205 shows suspicious UA behavior. Block empty User-Agent requests. Implement JavaScript-based bot detection for sensitive endpoints.
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
34.32.225.205 has been assigned a threat score of 288/100 (Critical). A score this high marks a critical threat actor. This address has demonstrated persistent, aggressive malicious behavior across multiple detection vectors.
The following attack categories were identified:
📊 Threat Analysis
Our monitoring infrastructure has identified 34.32.225.205, geolocated to Groningen, Netherlands, operating on the network of Google LLC, as a source of suspicious network activity. During its 7-day observation window, we recorded 301 hostile requests from this IP — roughly 43 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. The diversity of 3 separate attack methods suggests a comprehensive attack toolkit — likely an automated scanner that tests for vulnerabilities across multiple categories. Our records show 117 malicious IPs originating from Netherlands, positioning it as a significant contributor to global threat activity. With a threat score of 288/100, this IP is among the most dangerous addresses in our database. Immediate and complete blocking is strongly 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.
Related Threats
🇳🇱 Top threats from Netherlands
91.92.43.144 (358)91.92.43.186 (358)91.92.43.190 (358)91.92.43.157 (358)91.92.43.153 (358)View all →Security Intelligence
💡 DDoS Mitigation Approaches
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.
💡 Open Redirect Exploitation
Open redirect vulnerabilities allow attackers to redirect users from trusted domains to malicious sites. While often underestimated, these flaws enable convincing phishing, token theft through redirect-based OAuth flows, and SSRF chains.