IP Threat Report
86.62.109.42
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 86.62.109.42 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 86.62.109.42 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
86.62.109.42 has been assigned a threat score of 80/100 (Critical). This places it in the critical threat category. Immediate blocking is strongly advised across all network perimeters.
📊 Threat Analysis
IP address 86.62.109.42 has been traced to Moscow, Russia, operating on the network of JSC "ER-Telecom Holding" Moscow branch. Our threat detection systems have flagged this address based on observed malicious behavior patterns. Over a period of 4 days, this IP generated 441 malicious requests, averaging approximately 110.3 requests per day. With 101 flagged addresses, Russia represents a significant presence in our threat database. A threat score of 80/100 places this IP in the high-risk category. Blocking at the firewall level is recommended.
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.
💡 False Positive Management
False positives erode trust in security systems and waste analyst resources. Effective management requires feedback loops, allowlisting mechanisms, contextual analysis, and regular tuning of detection rules based on operational experience.