
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Directory Scan | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +0 |
Reconstructed HTTP requests from server access logs. Target domains redacted for security.
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
Add 72.56.159.230 to your firewall blocklist. Review logs for successful connections. Enable comprehensive logging on all public-facing services.
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.
72.56.159.230 has been assigned a threat score of 65/100 (High). At this threat level, the IP is considered high risk. Firewall rules should be updated to deny traffic from this source.
IP address 72.56.159.230 has been traced to Moscow, Russia, operating on the network of WS Telecom Inc. Our threat detection systems have flagged this address based on observed malicious behavior patterns. The address has been active for 8 days in our monitoring system, producing 599 flagged requests at a rate of ~74.9/day. The address is classified as residential, meaning it likely belongs to an end-user ISP connection. Malicious activity from residential IPs typically indicates device compromise or botnet membership. With 116 flagged addresses, Russia represents a significant presence in our threat database. At 65/100, this IP presents a meaningful threat. Implement rate limiting with escalation to blocking.
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.
When multiple IPs in a subnet show malicious behavior, subnet blocking efficiently neutralizes the threat. However, overly broad blocking risks impacting legitimate users. Analysis of subnet ownership and historical behavior guides appropriate blocking scope.
Internet traffic routing through a limited number of submarine cables and exchange points creates natural chokepoints. Understanding these routing patterns helps explain geographic clustering of certain attack types and latency-based scanning behaviors.