IP Threat Report
86.38.98.69
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| UA changed for same IP | Multiple User-Agents — bot rotation technique | +25 | |
| Danger strong hits: 113 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| Danger medium hits: 268 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +60 | |
| Burst: 44 req / 2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst: 158 req / 10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 |
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 86.38.98.69 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
🤖 User-Agent Anomaly Defense
IP 86.38.98.69 shows suspicious UA behavior. Block empty User-Agent requests. Implement JavaScript-based bot detection for sensitive endpoints.
🌊 Flood / DDoS Mitigation
Implement limit_req_zone in nginx. Deploy CDN with DDoS protection. Configure SYN cookies and connection tracking to throttle 86.38.98.69.
Open Ports & Services
Network reconnaissance data from Shodan. Open ports may indicate running services, misconfigurations, or potential attack surfaces.
| Port | Service | Risk | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1443 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 1443 |
| 4000 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 4000 |
| 7443 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 7443 |
| 8443 | HTTPS-Alt | Low | Service on port 8443 |
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
86.38.98.69 has been assigned a threat score of 255/100 (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
86.38.98.69 is registered in Berlin, Germany, operating on the network of Cyberzone S.A.. This IP first appeared in our threat feeds after triggering multiple behavioral detection signatures. 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. Two attack patterns were identified (User-Agent Anomaly and Request Flooding), suggesting a semi-automated campaign that targets multiple vulnerabilities. Our records show 102 malicious IPs originating from Germany, positioning it as a significant contributor to global threat activity. At 255/100, this is an extremely high-risk address. All traffic should be considered hostile.
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
🇩🇪 Top threats from Germany
15.220.152.241 (320)77.81.65.244 (313)185.168.29.98 (313)91.217.249.222 (305)212.30.36.219 (305)View all →Security Intelligence
💡 TLS Fingerprinting (JA3/JA4)
TLS fingerprinting creates unique identifiers based on how clients negotiate encrypted connections. The JA3 and JA4 methods generate hashes from TLS ClientHello parameters, enabling identification of specific tools and malware regardless of IP address changes.
💡 HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 Security Implications
Modern HTTP protocols introduce new attack surfaces including stream multiplexing abuse, header compression attacks (HPACK bombing), and rapid reset attacks. Security tools must evolve to handle these protocol-specific threats effectively.