ABUSE.MOM
THREAT REPORT

IP Threat Report
64.31.20.22

ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED

Generated: 2026-05-30 06:43:32
First seen: 2026-03-10 14:51:28
Last seen: 2026-05-30 06:40:51
105

⛔ Verdict: BLOCK

This IP address has been classified as a source of malicious automated activity. Threat score: 105/100. Total malicious requests observed: 11579.

BURSTDANGER_PATHFORM_SPAMRATIO_404REDIRECT_PROBEREFERERUA_CHANGED
01

Geolocation & Classification

IP Address
64.31.20.22
Type
Residential
Country
🇺🇸 United States
City
Washington
ISP
Limestone Networks, Inc.
Organization
Limestone Networks
Autonomous System
AS46475 Limestone Networks, Inc.
Hit Count
11579
02

Detection Signatures

SignatureDescriptionPointsSeverity
404 ratio 40-60%Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration+15
Burst 11/10sAbnormally fast request rate — automated scanning+35
Burst 5/2sAbnormally fast request rate — automated scanning+35
Burst 6/2sAbnormally fast request rate — automated scanning+35
Burst: 11 req / 10sAbnormally fast request rate — automated scanning+35
Burst: 12 req / 10sAbnormally fast request rate — automated scanning+35
Burst: 5 req / 2sAbnormally fast request rate — automated scanning+35
Burst: 6 req / 2sAbnormally fast request rate — automated scanning+35
Danger medium hits: 6Medium-risk: admin panels, config files+60
Foreign refererReferer from unrelated external domain+10
Foreign referer seenReferer from unrelated external domain+10
Form spam: no_js_checkSpam/malware keywords in request content+0
Probe pattern 302->404 same pathBehavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis+20
UA changedMultiple User-Agents — bot rotation technique+25
UA changed for same IPMultiple User-Agents — bot rotation technique+25
Σ = 410
03

Observed Activity

Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.

[redacted]
GET
/
200
[redacted]
GET
/page
200
Requests shown: 2 · HTTP 404: 0 · Dangerous patterns: 0

* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.

04

Timeline

2026-03-10 14:51:28
First malicious request detected
IP entered monitoring from server access logs
During observation
Multiple detection signatures triggered
404 ratio 40-60% (+15), Burst 11/10s (+35), Burst 5/2s (+35)
2026-05-30 06:40:51
Last malicious request observed
Total score reached: 105/100
Next cycle
IP blocked — all subsequent requests denied (HTTP 403)
Added to blocklist automatically
05

Network Provider

Limestone Networks, Inc.
AS46475 · 🇺🇸 United States
06

Recommendations

Actions taken & recommended

  • IP 64.31.20.22 is blocked at application level (HTTP 403)
  • Consider blocking at firewall level (iptables/CSF) to reduce server load
  • Other malicious IPs detected in the same /24 subnet — consider blocking 64.31.20.0/24
  • 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 64.31.20.22: rate-limit 404 responses per IP, deploy a honeypot 404 page, ensure no backup files are web-accessible.

🌊 Flood / DDoS Mitigation

Implement limit_req_zone in nginx. Deploy CDN with DDoS protection. Configure SYN cookies and connection tracking to throttle 64.31.20.22.

📧 Spam Protection

Enable CAPTCHA on all public forms. Add honeypot fields. Rate-limit submissions to 3 per minute per IP. Deploy Akismet or CleanTalk.

🤖 Bot Detection

Address UA spoofing from 64.31.20.22: maintain blocklist of known malicious UA strings, require consistent UA across sessions, implement TLS fingerprinting.

07

Neighbors in 64.31.20.0/24

Other blocked IPs from the same /24 subnet — indicates systematic abuse from this network range.

09

Blacklist Status (DNSBL)

This IP was checked against major DNS-based blacklists used by mail servers and firewalls worldwide.

✓ Clean
dnsbl.dronebl.org
✓ Clean
bl.blocklist.de
✓ Clean
zen.spamhaus.org
✓ Clean
spam.dnsbl.sorbs.net
✓ Clean
psbl.surriel.com
✓ Clean
b.barracudacentral.org
✓ Clean
cbl.abuseat.org

Checked: Spamhaus, SpamCop, Barracuda, SORBS, CBL, UCEProtect. Results may change over time.

10

Threat Analysis

64.31.20.22 has been assigned a threat score of 105/100 (Critical). With this rating, the IP falls into the critical severity bracket — among the most dangerous addresses in our monitoring database.

The following attack categories were identified:

Path EnumerationRequest FloodingUser-Agent Anomaly

📊 Threat Analysis

64.31.20.22 is registered in Washington, United States, operating on the network of Limestone Networks, Inc.. This IP first appeared in our threat feeds after triggering multiple behavioral detection signatures. The address has been active for 80 days in our monitoring system, producing 11,579 flagged requests at a rate of ~144.7/day. This residential IP is likely a compromised consumer device. Home routers and IoT equipment with default credentials are prime targets for botnet operators. The diversity of 3 separate attack methods suggests a comprehensive attack toolkit — likely an automated scanner that tests for vulnerabilities across multiple categories. United States currently accounts for 121 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 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.

11

Related Threats

🇺🇸 Top threats from United States

104.28.246.115 (350)104.28.246.113 (340)104.28.246.116 (340)104.28.235.58 (340)104.28.246.122 (340)View all →

🏢 Same network: AS46475

38.248.89.227 (240)38.248.90.25 (195)38.248.95.254 (130)64.31.3.126 (130)38.248.89.70 (120)View all →
12

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.

💡 Responsible Disclosure Ethics

Responsible disclosure balances public safety with giving vendors time to patch vulnerabilities. The security community generally supports coordinated disclosure timelines, but disagreements about appropriate timeframes and full disclosure continue to drive policy debates.

🔍 Check Any IP Address

Share this report: