
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| UA suspicious (short/empty) | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +15 | |
| Danger strong hits: 12 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger medium hits: 252 | 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: 32 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 98 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger strong hits: 18 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Burst: 38 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 122 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Danger strong hits: 15 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger medium hits: 250 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Burst: 33 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 102 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 43 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 144 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 55 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 184 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 35 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 116 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 51.103.48.143 shows suspicious UA behavior. Block empty User-Agent requests. Implement JavaScript-based bot detection for sensitive endpoints.
IP 51.103.48.143 is enumerating directories. Configure fail2ban apache-404 jail after 10+ 404 errors. Disable directory listings. Normalize all 404 responses.
Implement limit_req_zone in nginx. Deploy CDN with DDoS protection. Configure SYN cookies and connection tracking to throttle 51.103.48.143.
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.
51.103.48.143 has been assigned a threat score of 280/100 (Critical). This represents a critical risk level. Our detection systems have flagged multiple high-confidence indicators of malicious intent from this address.
The following attack categories were identified:
IP address 51.103.48.143 has been traced to Paris, France, operating on the network of Microsoft. Our threat detection systems have flagged this address based on observed malicious behavior patterns. Over a period of 1 days, this IP generated 6 malicious requests, averaging approximately 6 requests per day. This address belongs to a datacenter or cloud hosting provider. Hosting IPs are frequently leveraged by threat actors who rent cheap VPS instances specifically for conducting attacks. 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 201 malicious IPs originating from France, positioning it as a significant contributor to global threat activity. With a threat score of 280/100, this IP is among the most dangerous addresses in our database. Immediate and complete blocking is strongly recommended.
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.
False positives erode trust in security systems and waste analyst resources. Effective management requires feedback loops, allowlisting mechanisms, contextual analysis, and regular tuning of detection rules based on operational experience.