IP Threat Report
51.15.20.32
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Danger medium hits: 6 | 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 | |
| Foreign referer seen | Referer from unrelated external domain | +10 |
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 51.15.20.32 is blocked at application level (HTTP 403)
- Consider blocking at firewall level (iptables/CSF) to reduce server load
- Report abuse to the network provider via their abuse contact
- Ensure sensitive files (.env, .git, backups) are not accessible from the web
🔎 Path Enumeration Protection
Block scanning from 51.15.20.32: rate-limit 404 responses per IP, deploy a honeypot 404 page, ensure no backup files are web-accessible.
Open Ports & Services
Network reconnaissance data from Shodan. Open ports may indicate running services, misconfigurations, or potential attack surfaces.
| Port | Service | Risk | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 22 | SSH | Low | Secure Shell — common brute force target for remote access |
| 80 | HTTP | Low | HTTP web server — standard web traffic |
| 443 | HTTPS | Low | HTTPS web server — encrypted web traffic |
| CVE ID | Link |
|---|---|
| CVE-2013-4365 | NVD → |
| CVE-2009-2299 | NVD → |
| CVE-2013-0941 | NVD → |
| CVE-2012-3526 | NVD → |
| CVE-2011-2688 | NVD → |
| CVE-2013-2765 | NVD → |
| CVE-2011-1176 | NVD → |
| CVE-2013-0942 | NVD → |
| CVE-2012-4360 | NVD → |
| CVE-2009-0796 | NVD → |
| CVE-2007-4723 | NVD → |
| CVE-2012-4001 | NVD → |
🔴 Security scanning identified 12 vulnerability entries on this host. This volume strongly suggests severely outdated software. Consult NVD advisories for details.
Data source: Shodan InternetDB. Scanned independently of abuse.mom.
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
51.15.20.32 has been assigned a threat score of 105/100 (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:
📊 Threat Analysis
Threat intelligence analysis has linked 51.15.20.32 to malicious activity originating from Haarlem, Netherlands, operating on the network of Online SAS NL. The address has been under observation since its initial detection. The address has been active for 1 days in our monitoring system, producing 1 flagged requests at a rate of ~1/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 IP exhibits directory enumeration behavior, systematically requesting non-existent paths to discover hidden files and misconfigured resources. A score of 105/100 places this address in the top tier of severity. Block and investigate any historical connections.
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.
Related Threats
🇳🇱 Top threats from Netherlands
51.158.145.118 (105)51.158.249.12 (100)51.158.148.172 (75)51.15.15.102 (65)51.15.17.28 (65)View all →Security Intelligence
💡 Prototype Pollution Attacks
Prototype pollution manipulates JavaScript object prototypes to inject properties that affect all objects in an application. This can lead to denial of service, property injection, and in some cases remote code execution in Node.js applications.
💡 GraphQL Security Risks
GraphQL APIs introduce specific vulnerabilities including introspection information disclosure, query complexity attacks, batching abuse, and authorization bypass through nested queries. Depth limiting, cost analysis, and field-level authorization address these GraphQL-specific threats.