IP Threat Report
57.129.106.133
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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: 23 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 24 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| UA bot: python | Known bot/crawler User-Agent detected | +40 |
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 57.129.106.133 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
🔎 Directory Scan Defense
IP 57.129.106.133 is enumerating directories. Configure fail2ban apache-404 jail after 10+ 404 errors. Disable directory listings. Normalize all 404 responses.
🌊 Flood / DDoS Mitigation
Implement limit_req_zone in nginx. Deploy CDN with DDoS protection. Configure SYN cookies and connection tracking to throttle 57.129.106.133.
🤖 Bot Detection
Address UA spoofing from 57.129.106.133: maintain blocklist of known malicious UA strings, require consistent UA across sessions, implement TLS fingerprinting.
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 |
| 2066 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 2066 |
| 2096 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 2096 |
| 2100 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 2100 |
| 2196 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 2196 |
| 2200 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 2200 |
| 2259 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 2259 |
| 3089 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 3089 |
| CVE ID | Link |
|---|---|
| CVE-2007-2768 | NVD → |
| CVE-2023-51767 | NVD → |
| CVE-2008-3844 | NVD → |
🔴 Security scanning identified 3 vulnerability entries on this host. Multiple vulnerabilities suggest gaps in patch management. 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
57.129.106.133 has been assigned a threat score of 105/100 (Critical). This places it in the critical threat category. Immediate blocking is strongly advised across all network perimeters.
The following attack categories were identified:
📊 Threat Analysis
Our monitoring infrastructure has identified 57.129.106.133, geolocated to Frankfurt am Main, Germany, operating on the network of OVH SAS, as a source of suspicious network activity. During its 8-day observation window, we recorded 4 hostile requests from this IP — roughly 0.5 per day on average. Operating from datacenter infrastructure, this IP is typical of addresses used in organized attack operations. Cloud and VPS providers are commonly exploited as launching platforms for automated scanning. With 3 different attack patterns detected, this IP exhibits behavior characteristic of advanced automated scanning frameworks. Germany currently accounts for 104 blocked IPs in our database, making it a significant source of malicious traffic. With a threat score of 105/100, 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
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.
💡 Mobile Network Threat Landscape
Mobile carrier NAT (CGNAT) means thousands of users share a single public IP, making mobile IPs unreliable for reputation scoring. However, mobile networks are increasingly used as attack platforms through compromised apps and malicious SDKs.