IP Threat Report
52.141.4.186
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| UA suspicious (short/empty) | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +15 | |
| Danger strong hits: 42 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger medium hits: 368 | 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: 12 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 44 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 |
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 52.141.4.186 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
🤖 Bot Detection
Address UA spoofing from 52.141.4.186: maintain blocklist of known malicious UA strings, require consistent UA across sessions, implement TLS fingerprinting.
🔎 Path Enumeration Protection
Block scanning from 52.141.4.186: rate-limit 404 responses per IP, deploy a honeypot 404 page, ensure no backup files are web-accessible.
🌊 Traffic Flood Defense
IP 52.141.4.186 is generating excessive traffic. Limit connections per source IP. Enable geographic blocking if traffic from this region is unexpected.
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
52.141.4.186 has been assigned a threat score of 280/100 (Critical). This is a critical-level threat. Systems administrators should treat this IP as hostile and block all inbound connections without exception.
The following attack categories were identified:
📊 Threat Analysis
Network traffic from 52.141.4.186, located in Seoul, South Korea, operating on the network of Microsoft Corporation, has been classified as malicious by our automated threat scoring engine. 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 diversity of 3 separate attack methods suggests a comprehensive attack toolkit — likely an automated scanner that tests for vulnerabilities across multiple categories. South Korea currently accounts for 146 blocked IPs in our database, making it a significant source of malicious traffic. 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.
Related Threats
🇰🇷 Top threats from South Korea
4.217.180.34 (280)20.214.155.242 (280)20.214.157.214 (280)52.231.66.246 (280)20.194.25.241 (280)View all →Security Intelligence
💡 User-Agent Analysis Techniques
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.
💡 Web Application Firewall Strategies
WAFs inspect HTTP traffic to block common attacks but require careful tuning. Overly aggressive rules cause false positives while permissive configurations miss attacks. Modern WAFs combine signature matching with behavioral analysis and machine learning.