IP威胁报告
91.92.42.131
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 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 91.92.42.131 已在应用层封锁（HTTP 403）
- 建议在防火墙层（iptables/CSF）进行封锁
- 在同一/24子网中检测到其他恶意IP——建议封锁 91.92.42.0/24
- 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 91.92.42.131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。
邻居在 91.92.42.0/24
来自同一/24子网的其他被封锁IP——表明该网络范围存在系统性滥用。
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
91.92.42.131 has been assigned a threat score of 65/100 (High). 这将其归类为高严重性威胁。建议对敏感基础设施进行主动封锁。
The following attack categories were identified:
📊 Threat Analysis
IP地址91.92.42.131已追溯至Amsterdam, Netherlands，运营在LLC VASH KREDIT BANK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4天的时间内，此IP产生了326次恶意请求，平均每天约81.5次请求。 此IP被识别为VPN或代理端点，通常用于掩盖攻击流量的真实来源并绕过地理或信誉封锁。 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。 Netherlands目前在我们的数据库中占108个被封锁IP，使其成为恶意流量的重要来源。 评分65/100需要主动监控和速率限制。建议对敏感系统进行完全封锁。
This IP is associated with a VPN or proxy service. Attackers frequently route their traffic through anonymizing services to obscure their true location. This makes attribution more challenging but the malicious behavior patterns remain detectable.
Related Threats
🇳🇱 Top threats from Netherlands
91.92.43.144 (358)91.92.43.186 (358)91.92.43.190 (358)91.92.43.157 (358)91.92.43.153 (358)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.
💡 Automated Incident Response
Automated response systems can block threats in milliseconds, far faster than human analysts. However, automation requires careful safeguards — rate limits on blocking actions, automatic expiration, and human review queues prevent automated systems from causing self-inflicted outages.