
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| UA suspicious (short/empty) | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +15 | |
| Danger strong hits: 16 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger medium hits: 312 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Burst: 42 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 148 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger strong hits: 6 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger medium hits: 194 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| 404 ratio 40-60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +15 | |
| Probe pattern 302->404 same path | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +20 | |
| Burst: 47 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 152 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger strong hits: 9 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Burst: 50 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 165 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 44 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 142 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 40 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 106 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 46 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 136 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger medium hits: 192 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Burst: 48 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 174 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 |
Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
IP 4.232.94.52 shows suspicious UA behavior. Block empty User-Agent requests. Implement JavaScript-based bot detection for sensitive endpoints.
IP 4.232.94.52 is generating excessive traffic. Limit connections per source IP. Enable geographic blocking if traffic from this region is unexpected.
Block scanning from 4.232.94.52: rate-limit 404 responses per IP, deploy a honeypot 404 page, ensure no backup files are web-accessible.
Other blocked IPs from the same /24 subnet — indicates systematic abuse from this network range.
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.
4.232.94.52 has been assigned a threat score of 280/100 (Critical). This places it in the critical threat category. Immediate blocking is strongly advised across all network perimeters.
The following attack categories were identified:
The address 4.232.94.52 originates from Milan, Italy, operating on the network of Microsoft Corporation. It was identified through automated analysis of incoming network traffic across monitored endpoints. Our sensors captured 7 malicious requests from this address across a 1-day span, reflecting a sustained attack cadence of ~7 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 diversity of 3 separate attack methods suggests a comprehensive attack toolkit — likely an automated scanner that tests for vulnerabilities across multiple categories. Italy currently accounts for 101 blocked IPs in our database, making it a significant source of malicious traffic. At 280/100, this is an extremely high-risk address. All traffic should be considered hostile.
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.
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.
CAPTCHAs remain a primary bot defense but face increasing bypass rates from AI-powered solvers. Modern alternatives include invisible behavioral analysis, proof-of-work challenges, and device fingerprinting that detect bots without impacting user experience.