IP Threat Report
91.230.225.216
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| UA suspicious (short/empty) | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +15 | |
| Danger strong hits: 1 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +25 | |
| Danger medium hits: 1 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +10 | |
| 404 ratio >= 60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +25 | |
| UA bot: Go-http-client | Known bot/crawler User-Agent detected | +40 | |
| Danger strong hits: 3 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +75 | |
| Danger medium hits: 3 | Medium-risk: admin panels, config files | +30 |
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 91.230.225.216 is blocked at application level (HTTP 403)
- Consider blocking at firewall level (iptables/CSF) to reduce server load
- Other malicious IPs detected in the same /24 subnet — consider blocking 91.230.225.0/24
- Report abuse to the network provider via their abuse contact
- Ensure sensitive files (.env, .git, backups) are not accessible from the web
🤖 Bot Detection
Address UA spoofing from 91.230.225.216: maintain blocklist of known malicious UA strings, require consistent UA across sessions, implement TLS fingerprinting.
🔎 Path Enumeration Protection
Block scanning from 91.230.225.216: rate-limit 404 responses per IP, deploy a honeypot 404 page, ensure no backup files are web-accessible.
Neighbors in 91.230.225.0/24
Other blocked IPs from the same /24 subnet — indicates systematic abuse from this network range.
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
91.230.225.216 has been assigned a threat score of 145/100 (Critical). With this rating, the IP falls into the critical severity bracket — among the most dangerous addresses in our monitoring database.
The following attack categories were identified:
📊 Threat Analysis
91.230.225.216 is registered in London, United Kingdom, operating on the network of F.N.S. HOLDINGS LIMITED. This IP first appeared in our threat feeds after triggering multiple behavioral detection signatures. The address has been active for 43 days in our monitoring system, producing 2 flagged requests at a rate of ~0/day. This residential IP is likely a compromised consumer device. Home routers and IoT equipment with default credentials are prime targets for botnet operators. The dual attack vectors of User-Agent Anomaly combined with Path Enumeration indicate a coordinated assault rather than opportunistic scanning. United Kingdom currently accounts for 143 blocked IPs in our database, making it a significant source of malicious traffic. With a threat score of 145/100, 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
🇬🇧 Top threats from United Kingdom
104.28.208.60 (340)104.28.240.60 (340)91.230.225.3 (305)45.86.203.224 (305)45.86.203.35 (305)View all →Security Intelligence
💡 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.
💡 File Upload Vulnerabilities
Insecure file upload functionality allows attackers to upload web shells, malware, or scripts that execute on the server. Proper validation must check file content, not just extensions, and uploaded files should be stored outside the web root.