IP威胁报告
76.16.134.28
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 48/10s | 请求频率异常——自动扫描 | +35 | |
| Burst 48/2s | 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 76.16.134.28 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76.16.134.28。
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
76.16.134.28 has been assigned a threat score of 80/100 (Critical). 如此高的分数标志着一个关键威胁行为者。该地址在多个检测向量上表现出持续的、激进的恶意行为。
The following attack categories were identified:
📊 Threat Analysis
威胁情报分析将76.16.134.28与来自Chicago, United States，运营在Comcast Cable Communications, LLC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。 在其2天的观察窗口期间，我们记录了来自此IP的64次敌对请求——平均每天约32次。 从住宅网络运营，此IP可能代表一个被入侵的家庭网关或已被招募到更大攻击基础设施中的IoT设备。 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。 United States目前在我们的数据库中占36,321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 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 States
104.28.246.115 (350)104.28.214.122 (350)216.73.160.52 (350)34.187.158.4 (340)34.186.187.208 (340)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.
💡 Subnet-Level vs IP-Level Blocking
When multiple IPs in a subnet show malicious behavior, subnet blocking efficiently neutralizes the threat. However, overly broad blocking risks impacting legitimate users. Analysis of subnet ownership and historical behavior guides appropriate blocking scope.