IP Threat Report
85.121.5.215
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Danger strong hits: 10 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger medium hits: 33 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| 404 ratio 40-60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +15 | |
| Danger medium hits: 4 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +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 85.121.5.215 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
🔎 Path Enumeration Protection
Block scanning from 85.121.5.215: rate-limit 404 responses per IP, deploy a honeypot 404 page, ensure no backup files are web-accessible.
Open Ports & Services
Network reconnaissance data from Shodan. Open ports may indicate running services, misconfigurations, or potential attack surfaces.
| Port | Service | Risk | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 135 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 135 |
| 445 | SMB | Critical | SMB file sharing — high-risk for EternalBlue and ransomware |
| 3389 | RDP | High | Remote Desktop Protocol — primary target for ransomware attacks |
| 5357 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 5357 |
| 5985 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 5985 |
| 5986 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 5986 |
⚠️ 2 high-risk ports detected on 85.121.5.215. Exposed RDP (3389) is the #1 entry point for ransomware attacks. SMB (445) exposure is associated with worm propagation and EternalBlue exploits. These services should not be publicly accessible without strict firewall rules.
| CVE ID | Link |
|---|---|
| CVE-2020-0796 | NVD → |
🔴 This host has 1 known CVE associated with its exposed services. Even a small number of CVEs can represent significant risk. Review each CVE in the NVD database.
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
85.121.5.215 has been assigned a threat score of 175/100 (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
Network traffic from 85.121.5.215, located in Chisinau, MD, operating on the network of Alexhost SRL, has been classified as malicious by our automated threat scoring engine. The address has been active for 1 days in our monitoring system, producing 3 flagged requests at a rate of ~3/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. The IP exhibits directory enumeration behavior, systematically requesting non-existent paths to discover hidden files and misconfigured resources. With a threat score of 175/100, 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.
Related Threats
🏢 Same network: AS200019
45.93.9.183 (240)5.63.19.3 (215)2.59.219.178 (140)5.181.1.66 (70)193.177.0.103 (70)View all →Security Intelligence
💡 Server-Side Template Injection
SSTI occurs when user input is embedded in server-side templates without sanitization. Successful exploitation often leads to remote code execution, as template engines typically have access to powerful server-side functionality.
💡 Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)
SSRF attacks trick servers into making requests to internal resources that should not be publicly accessible. This can expose cloud metadata endpoints, internal APIs, and private network services, potentially leading to full infrastructure compromise.