IP Threat Report
92.38.143.225
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Danger strong hits: 4 | High-risk paths: shells, RCE vectors, exploits | +100 | |
| 404 ratio 40-60% | Majority of requests returned 404 — enumeration | +15 | |
| Probe pattern 302->404 same path | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +20 |
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 92.38.143.225 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 92.38.143.0/24
- Report abuse to the network provider via their abuse contact
- Ensure sensitive files (.env, .git, backups) are not accessible from the web
🔎 Directory Scan Defense
IP 92.38.143.225 is enumerating directories. Configure fail2ban apache-404 jail after 10+ 404 errors. Disable directory listings. Normalize all 404 responses.
Neighbors in 92.38.143.0/24
Other blocked IPs from the same /24 subnet — indicates systematic abuse from this network range.
Open Ports & Services
Network reconnaissance data from Shodan. Open ports may indicate running services, misconfigurations, or potential attack surfaces.
| Port | Service | Risk | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 111 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 111 |
| 4040 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 4040 |
| 10250 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 10250 |
| 10255 | Unknown | Low | Service on port 10255 |
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
92.38.143.225 has been assigned a threat score of 135/100 (Critical). This represents a critical risk level. Our detection systems have flagged multiple high-confidence indicators of malicious intent from this address.
The following attack categories were identified:
📊 Threat Analysis
Network traffic from 92.38.143.225, located in Chester, United Kingdom, operating on the network of GCL, has been classified as malicious by our automated threat scoring engine. Over a period of 2 days, this IP generated 2 malicious requests, averaging approximately 1 requests per day. This is a residential IP address, suggesting a compromised home device such as a router, smart appliance, or infected workstation participating in a botnet. Active path scanning has been detected — this IP probes for hundreds of common file and directory names. Our records show 190 malicious IPs originating from United Kingdom, positioning it as a significant contributor to global threat activity. With a threat score of 135/100, 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
💡 Remote Code Execution (RCE)
RCE vulnerabilities allow attackers to execute arbitrary code on target servers. These critical flaws often arise from deserialization bugs, template injection, or file upload vulnerabilities, and represent the highest severity class of web application weaknesses.
💡 API Abuse and Enumeration
Modern attacks increasingly target APIs rather than traditional web interfaces. Attackers enumerate endpoints, test for broken authentication, and exploit excessive data exposure. API attacks are harder to detect as they mimic legitimate programmatic access patterns.