IP Threat Report
35.181.61.180
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| 404 ratio >= 60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +25 | |
| Burst 192/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 200/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 53/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 58/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 62/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 63/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 64/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger medium hits: 40 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger medium hits: 80 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger strong hits: 248 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger strong hits: 740 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| POST seen | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +8 |
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 35.181.61.180 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 35.181.61.180: rate-limit 404 responses per IP, deploy a honeypot 404 page, ensure no backup files are web-accessible.
🌊 Flood / DDoS Mitigation
Implement limit_req_zone in nginx. Deploy CDN with DDoS protection. Configure SYN cookies and connection tracking to throttle 35.181.61.180.
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
35.181.61.180 has been assigned a threat score of 263/100 (Critical). With this rating, the IP falls into the critical severity bracket — among the most dangerous addresses in our monitoring database.
The following attack categories were identified:
📊 Threat Analysis
IP address 35.181.61.180 has been traced to Paris, France, operating on the network of Amazon.com, Inc.. Our threat detection systems have flagged this address based on observed malicious behavior patterns. The address has been active for 3 days in our monitoring system, producing 772 flagged requests at a rate of ~257.3/day. Operating from datacenter infrastructure, this IP is typical of addresses used in organized attack operations. Cloud and VPS providers are commonly exploited as launching platforms for automated scanning. Two attack patterns were identified (Path Enumeration and Request Flooding), suggesting a semi-automated campaign that targets multiple vulnerabilities. A score of 263/100 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
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.
💡 Web Cache Poisoning Attacks
Cache poisoning manipulates web cache behavior to serve malicious content to other users. By identifying unkeyed inputs that influence cached responses, attackers can inject JavaScript, redirect users, or cause denial of service at scale through the cache infrastructure.