IP威胁报告
52.80.111.158
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Burst 17/10s | 请求频率异常——自动扫描 | +35 | |
| Burst 17/2s | 请求频率异常——自动扫描 | +35 | |
| Foreign referer | 来自无关外部域名的Referer | +10 |
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 52.80.111.158 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
🌊 洪水/DDoS缓解
在nginx中实施limit_req_zone。部署具有DDoS防护的CDN。配置SYN cookies和连接跟踪以限制52.80.111.158。
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
52.80.111.158 has been assigned a threat score of 80/100 (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
威胁情报分析将52.80.111.158与来自Beijing, China，运营在Beijing Guanghuan Xinwang Digital的网络中的恶意活动相关联。该地址自首次检测以来一直处于观察状态。 该地址在我们的监控系统中活跃了16天，产生了204次标记请求，速率约为每天12.8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。 来自此IP的基于速率的攻击旨在通过大量请求洪水压垮服务器资源。 China目前在我们的数据库中占2,899个被封锁IP，使其成为恶意流量的主要来源。 威胁评分80/100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 China
180.184.55.222 (340)82.157.132.42 (310)101.200.57.251 (310)135.136.42.150 (305)135.136.42.228 (295)View all →🏢 Same network: AS55960
54.223.136.107 (190)52.81.158.219 (175)71.131.253.176 (145)52.81.120.87 (130)140.179.25.128 (120)View all →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.