IP Threat Report
36.111.32.240
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| UA bot: java | Known bot/crawler User-Agent detected | +40 | |
| Danger strong hits: 2 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +50 | |
| Danger medium hits: 2 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +20 | |
| Probe pattern 302->404 same path | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +20 | |
| Burst: 12 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 36 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 13 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 29 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 10 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 24 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 |
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 36.111.32.240 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 36.111.32.0/24
- Report abuse to the network provider via their abuse contact
- Ensure sensitive files (.env, .git, backups) are not accessible from the web
🤖 Bot Detection
Address UA spoofing from 36.111.32.240: maintain blocklist of known malicious UA strings, require consistent UA across sessions, implement TLS fingerprinting.
🔎 Directory Scan Defense
IP 36.111.32.240 is enumerating directories. Configure fail2ban apache-404 jail after 10+ 404 errors. Disable directory listings. Normalize all 404 responses.
🌊 Traffic Flood Defense
IP 36.111.32.240 is generating excessive traffic. Limit connections per source IP. Enable geographic blocking if traffic from this region is unexpected.
Neighbors in 36.111.32.0/24
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
36.111.32.240 has been assigned a threat score of 200/100 (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
Threat intelligence analysis has linked 36.111.32.240 to malicious activity originating from Hangzhou, China, operating on the network of CHINANET Guangdong province network. The address has been under observation since its initial detection. Over a period of 54 days, this IP generated 3 malicious requests, averaging approximately 0.1 requests per day. This is a residential IP address, suggesting a compromised home device such as a router, smart appliance, or infected workstation participating in a botnet. The diversity of 3 separate attack methods suggests a comprehensive attack toolkit — likely an automated scanner that tests for vulnerabilities across multiple categories. With 194 flagged addresses, China represents a significant presence in our threat database. With a threat score of 200/100, this IP is among the most dangerous addresses in our database. Immediate and complete blocking is strongly recommended.
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.
Related Threats
Security Intelligence
💡 User-Agent Analysis Techniques
Analyzing User-Agent strings reveals automated tools masquerading as legitimate browsers. Inconsistencies between claimed browser capabilities and actual behavior, impossible version combinations, and known scanner signatures help identify malicious clients.
💡 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.