IP Threat Report
84.42.21.155
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| DDoS / Flood | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +0 |
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
Recommendations
Actions taken & recommended
- IP 84.42.21.155 is blocked at application level (HTTP 403)
- Consider blocking at firewall level (iptables/CSF) to reduce server load
- Ensure sensitive files (.env, .git, backups) are not accessible from the web
⚙️ Defensive Recommendations
Block 84.42.21.155 at the network perimeter. Implement defense-in-depth combining IP blocking with application-layer protections.
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
84.42.21.155 has been assigned a threat score of 80/100 (Critical). A score this high marks a critical threat actor. This address has demonstrated persistent, aggressive malicious behavior across multiple detection vectors.
📊 Threat Analysis
Our monitoring infrastructure has identified 84.42.21.155, geolocated to Tver, Russia, operating on the network of Macroregional Center, as a source of suspicious network activity. During its 17-day observation window, we recorded 344 hostile requests from this IP — roughly 20.2 per day on average. With 101 flagged addresses, Russia represents a significant presence in our threat database. The score of 80/100 indicates a confirmed malicious actor. Network-level blocking is appropriate.
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.
💡 HTTP Header Analysis for Threat Detection
Examining HTTP headers beyond User-Agent reveals attack tools and automated scripts. Missing standard headers, unusual ordering, non-standard values, and inconsistencies with claimed client identity all serve as reliable detection signals.