
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| UA suspicious (short/empty) | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +15 | |
| Danger strong hits: 2 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +50 | |
| Danger medium hits: 1 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +10 |
Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
Address UA spoofing from 63.135.161.135: maintain blocklist of known malicious UA strings, require consistent UA across sessions, implement TLS fingerprinting.
Other blocked IPs from the same /24 subnet — indicates systematic abuse from this network range.
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.
63.135.161.135 has been assigned a threat score of 75/100 (High). This classifies it as a high-severity threat. Proactive blocking is recommended for sensitive infrastructure.
The following attack categories were identified:
Network traffic from 63.135.161.135, located in New York, United States, operating on the network of F.N.S. HOLDINGS LIMITED, has been classified as malicious by our automated threat scoring engine. Over a period of 1 days, this IP generated 1 malicious requests, averaging approximately 1 requests per day. Operating from a residential network, this IP may represent a compromised home gateway or IoT device that has been drafted into a larger attack infrastructure. The IP exhibits User-Agent manipulation, switching between different browser identities or sending empty headers. United States currently accounts for 151 blocked IPs in our database, making it a significant source of malicious traffic. A threat score of 75/100 places this IP in the high-risk category. Blocking at the firewall level is recommended.
This IP is classified as residential, suggesting it may belong to a compromised home device, IoT botnet member, or an infected personal computer. Residential IPs involved in attacks often indicate malware infection without the owner's knowledge.
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.
Bulletproof hosting providers deliberately ignore abuse complaints, creating safe havens for malicious operations. These providers often operate in jurisdictions with weak cybercrime enforcement, offering services specifically marketed to criminal organizations.