IP威胁报告
167.71.169.206
ABUSE.MOM — 规矩点，否则你将被曝光
地理位置与分类
检测签名
| 签名 | 描述 | 分数 | 严重性 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Danger medium hits: 2 | 中等风险：管理面板、配置文件 | +20 | |
| Danger strong hits: 2 | 高风险路径：Webshell、RCE、漏洞利用 | +50 | |
| UA suspicious | 自动分析检测到行为异常 | +15 |
观察到的活动
从服务器访问日志重建的HTTP请求。出于安全考虑，目标域名已隐藏。
* Typical request patterns for detected signatures. Actual target domains are redacted.
时间线
网络供应商
建议
已采取和建议的措施
- IP 167.71.169.206 已在应用层封锁（HTTP 403）
- 建议在防火墙层（iptables/CSF）进行封锁
- 通过abuse联系方式向网络供应商举报
- 确保敏感文件（.env、.git、备份）无法从网络访问
🤖 User-Agent异常防御
IP 167.71.169.206显示可疑的UA行为。阻止空User-Agent请求。为敏感端点实施基于JavaScript的机器人检测。
黑名单状态 (DNSBL)
该IP已通过全球邮件服务器和防火墙使用的主要DNS黑名单进行检查。
已检查：Spamhaus、SpamCop、Barracuda、SORBS、CBL、UCEProtect。
Threat Analysis
167.71.169.206 has been assigned a threat score of 85/100 (Critical). 这将其归入严重威胁类别。强烈建议在所有网络边界立即进行封锁。
The following attack categories were identified:
📊 Threat Analysis
IP地址167.71.169.206已追溯至Clifton, United States，运营在DigitalOcean, LLC的网络中。我们的威胁检测系统根据观察到的恶意行为模式标记了此地址。 在其3天的观察窗口期间，我们记录了来自此IP的191次敌对请求——平均每天约63.7次。 该IP被归类为托管/数据中心基础设施，通常与用于自动化攻击活动、僵尸网络命令控制或大规模漏洞扫描的租用服务器相关联。 检测到可疑的User-Agent异常，包括空的、伪造的或快速轮换的UA字符串——自动化扫描工具的特征。 United States目前在我们的数据库中占128个被封锁IP，使其成为恶意流量的重要来源。 威胁评分85/100将此IP置于高风险类别。建议在防火墙级别进行封锁。
This IP belongs to a hosting or data center provider. Malicious traffic from hosting infrastructure often originates from compromised VPS instances, rented servers used for scanning campaigns, or abused free-tier cloud accounts. Hosting providers typically respond to abuse reports within 24-72 hours.
Related Threats
🇺🇸 Top threats from United States
104.28.246.115 (350)104.28.246.113 (340)104.28.246.116 (340)104.28.235.58 (340)104.28.246.122 (340)View all →Security Intelligence
💡 Directory Traversal Attacks
Path traversal attacks attempt to access files outside the intended directory by manipulating file path references. Attackers use sequences like ../ to reach sensitive system files such as /etc/passwd or application configuration files.
💡 Bulletproof Hosting Ecosystem
Bulletproof hosting providers deliberately ignore abuse complaints, creating safe havens for malicious operations. These providers often operate in jurisdictions with weak cybercrime enforcement, offering services specifically marketed to criminal organizations.