IP Threat Report
5.101.156.90
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Burst 7/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Foreign referer | Referer from unrelated external domain | +10 | |
| 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
Recommendations
Actions taken & recommended
- IP 5.101.156.90 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 5.101.156.0/24
- Ensure sensitive files (.env, .git, backups) are not accessible from the web
🌊 Flood / DDoS Mitigation
Implement limit_req_zone in nginx. Deploy CDN with DDoS protection. Configure SYN cookies and connection tracking to throttle 5.101.156.90.
🤖 User-Agent Anomaly Defense
IP 5.101.156.90 shows suspicious UA behavior. Block empty User-Agent requests. Implement JavaScript-based bot detection for sensitive endpoints.
Neighbors in 5.101.156.0/24
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
5.101.156.90 has been assigned a threat score of 70/100 (High). The IP is rated as a high-level threat. Network administrators should implement blocking rules and monitor for any connections from this address.
The following attack categories were identified:
📊 Threat Analysis
The address 5.101.156.90 originates from an unknown location. 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 dual attack vectors of Request Flooding combined with User-Agent Anomaly indicate a coordinated assault rather than opportunistic scanning. The score of 70/100 indicates a confirmed malicious actor. Network-level blocking is appropriate.
Related Threats
Top threats from ??
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.
💡 WordPress-Specific Attack Vectors
WordPress sites face constant automated attacks targeting xmlrpc.php for brute force amplification, wp-login.php for credential theft, and vulnerable plugins for remote code execution. Over 90% of CMS-based attacks specifically target WordPress installations.