
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| UA suspicious (short/empty) | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +15 | |
| Danger strong hits: 1 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +25 | |
| Danger medium hits: 1 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +10 | |
| 404 ratio >= 60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +25 | |
| UA changed for same IP | Multiple User-Agents — bot rotation technique | +25 | |
| Danger strong hits: 310 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger medium hits: 602 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Burst: 8 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 29 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger strong hits: 111 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger medium hits: 303 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Burst: 30 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger strong hits: 194 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger medium hits: 510 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger strong hits: 110 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger medium hits: 58 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Danger strong hits: 2 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +50 | |
| 404 ratio 40-60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +15 |
Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
IP 45.131.195.129 shows suspicious UA behavior. Block empty User-Agent requests. Implement JavaScript-based bot detection for sensitive endpoints.
Block scanning from 45.131.195.129: rate-limit 404 responses per IP, deploy a honeypot 404 page, ensure no backup files are web-accessible.
IP 45.131.195.129 is generating excessive traffic. Limit connections per source IP. Enable geographic blocking if traffic from this region is unexpected.
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.
45.131.195.129 has been assigned a threat score of 255/100 (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:
Network traffic from 45.131.195.129, located in Secaucus, United States, operating on the network of Clouvider Limited, has been classified as malicious by our automated threat scoring engine. Our sensors captured 8 malicious requests from this address across a 16-day span, reflecting a sustained attack cadence of ~0.5 requests per day. The address operates as a VPN/proxy exit node. Attackers route traffic through anonymizing services to obscure their real location and evade IP-based security controls. The combination of 3 distinct attack vectors indicates a sophisticated, multi-pronged threat actor deploying automated tools that probe multiple attack surfaces simultaneously. Our records show 211 malicious IPs originating from United States, positioning it as a significant contributor to global threat activity. With a threat score of 255/100, this IP is among the most dangerous addresses in our database. Immediate and complete blocking is strongly recommended.
This IP is associated with a VPN or proxy service. Attackers frequently route their traffic through anonymizing services to obscure their true location. This makes attribution more challenging but the malicious behavior patterns remain detectable.
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.
Responsible disclosure balances public safety with giving vendors time to patch vulnerabilities. The security community generally supports coordinated disclosure timelines, but disagreements about appropriate timeframes and full disclosure continue to drive policy debates.