IP Threat Report
95.27.40.83
ABUSE.MOM — BEHAVE OR GET EXPOSED
Geolocation & Classification
Detection Signatures
| Signature | Description | Points | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Burst 10/10s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 5/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 6/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Burst 7/2s | Abnormally fast request rate — automated scanning | +35 | |
| Foreign referer | Referer from unrelated external domain | +10 | |
| POST seen | Behavioral anomaly detected by automated analysis | +8 | |
| UA changed | Multiple User-Agents — bot rotation technique | +25 | |
| spam:no_js_check | Spam/malware keywords in request content | +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
Network Provider
Recommendations
Actions taken & recommended
- IP 95.27.40.83 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 95.27.40.0/24
- Report abuse to the network provider via their abuse contact
- Ensure sensitive files (.env, .git, backups) are not accessible from the web
🌊 Flood / DDoS Mitigation
Implement limit_req_zone in nginx. Deploy CDN with DDoS protection. Configure SYN cookies and connection tracking to throttle 95.27.40.83.
🤖 User-Agent Anomaly Defense
IP 95.27.40.83 shows suspicious UA behavior. Block empty User-Agent requests. Implement JavaScript-based bot detection for sensitive endpoints.
📧 Spam Protection
Enable CAPTCHA on all public forms. Add honeypot fields. Rate-limit submissions to 3 per minute per IP. Deploy Akismet or CleanTalk.
Neighbors in 95.27.40.0/24
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
95.27.40.83 has been assigned a threat score of 113/100 (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
Threat intelligence analysis has linked 95.27.40.83 to malicious activity originating from Kursk, Russia, operating on the network of CORBINA-BROADBAND. The address has been under observation since its initial detection. Our sensors captured 1,881 malicious requests from this address across a 5-day span, reflecting a sustained attack cadence of ~376.2 requests per 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 Request Flooding combined with User-Agent Anomaly indicate a coordinated assault rather than opportunistic scanning. Russia currently accounts for 105 blocked IPs in our database, making it a significant source of malicious traffic. With a threat score of 113/100, 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
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.
💡 Mobile Network Threat Landscape
Mobile carrier NAT (CGNAT) means thousands of users share a single public IP, making mobile IPs unreliable for reputation scoring. However, mobile networks are increasingly used as attack platforms through compromised apps and malicious SDKs.