142.44.228.116📋 Copy

# IP INTELLIGENCE BRIEFING

Target: 142.44.228.116/32

Date: Analysis based on current signal data

Classification: Moderate Risk / High-Abuse Subnet

---

## EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

IP address 142.44.228.116 is hosted on OVH infrastructure under the OVH-CUST-281059695 customer network block. The address registers a risk score of 40 (Moderate Risk) with no direct threat indicators, but operates within a subnet exhibiting high abuse density (0.7148) with 183 of 227 active siblings classified as threats. DNS resolution points to ahrefs.net infrastructure, though geolocation data shows significant inconsistencies.

---

## INFRASTRUCTURE PROFILE

Ownership & Assignment:

• Organization: Dmytro, Ahrefs Pte Ltd
• ASN: 16276 (OVH)
• CIDR Block: 142.44.228.0/24
• RIR: ARIN
• Infrastructure Type: Cloud Compute (OVH Hosting)

Network Classification:

• Provider: OVH
• Connection Type: Cloud-based hosting environment
• Service Status: Firewalled / No services exposed
• Not classified as: CDN, VPN, Proxy, Tor exit node, or mobile network

---

## DNS & IDENTIFICATION

Reverse DNS:

• PTR Hostname: `proxy-ca016-san116.ahrefs.net`
• Forward Resolution: `proxy-ca016-san116.ahrefs.net`
• Domain: `ahrefs.net`
• Forward Confirmed: No

Services:

• Open Ports: None detected
• TLS Certificate: Not present
• HTTP Title: No data
• Server Banner: No data
• Fingerprint: Insufficient data to identify service stack

---

## THREAT INDICATORS

Current Threat Posture:

• Risk Score: 40 (Moderate)
• Abuse Confidence Score: Not available
• Blacklist Count: 0
• Known Attacker: No
• Spam Source: No
• Known Campaigns: None
• Threat Feeds: Empty

Control Plane Analysis:

• DNSBL Listings: 1 of 8 total lists
• Operator Score: 0.2174 (Minimal)
• Route Stability: Unstable (false)
• RPKI State: Not available
• IRR Consistency: Not available

Geolocation Discrepancy:

• Reported Location: Singapore (QC, CA)
• RTT Violation: 31ms observed vs. minimum possible 112ms for 5,598km distance
• Assessment: Geolocation data appears unreliable; distance/time-to-live metrics indicate inconsistency

---

## SUBNET ANALYSIS

Network Context: 142.44.228.0/24

• Total Siblings: 256
• Active Siblings: 227
• Threat Siblings: 183 (80.6% threat ratio)
• Abuse Density: 0.7148 (High Abuse Classification)
• Inherited Risk Score: 28

Neighboring IP Risk Distribution:

• High Risk: 0
• Medium Risk: 44
• Low Risk: 56

Risk Assessment: The target IP resides in a subnet with significant abuse activity. While this specific IP lacks direct threat indicators, the high concentration of malicious activity in the /24 subnet represents an elevated contextual risk.

---

## OBSERVATION HISTORY

Signal Count: 23 observations

• Recent Classification: Consistent cloud/hosting infrastructure designation
• Provider Consistency: OVH maintained across observations
• Threat Persistence: 0 days (not persistently malicious)
• Ownership Changes: 0

Notable Historical Signals:

• June 20, 2026: High abuse density classification (0.7148)
• June 28, 2026: Cloud infrastructure confirmation
• Multiple routing and reputation observations recorded

---

## RELATIONSHIP GRAPH

Identified Relationships:

• Same Network (41+ instances): OVH-CUST-281059695
• No certificate associations detected
• No correlated IPs identified beyond subnet relationships

---

## RECOMMENDED ACTIONS

Firewall & Blocking Rules:

Action Rationale:

• Risk score of 40 with subnet abuse density of 0.7148
• No direct threat indicators, but contextual risk from neighborhood
• Blocking recommended as precautionary measure within high-abuse subnet

Additional Considerations:

• Monitor for service exposure (currently firewalled)
• Consider blocking broader subnet (142.44.228.0/24) if threat tolerance permits
• Cross-reference with existing threat intelligence sources
• Geolocation data should not be used for decision-making due to inconsistencies

---

## INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENT

This IP presents moderate contextual risk primarily driven by its placement within a high-abuse subnet rather than direct malicious activity. The address resolves to legitimate ahrefs.net infrastructure on OVH hosting. While no active threat indicators are present, the subnet's 80

Thinking Process:

1. Analyze the Request:

* Task: Continue exactly where the previous response left off.

* Constraint: Do not repeat text already written. Finish the remaining answer only.

* Context: The previous response was cut off mid-sentence ("The subnet's 80"). I need to complete that sentence and the rest of the briefing based on the data provided in the initial tool calls.

* Role: IP Intelligence Analyst for IPDebrief.

* Tone: Factual, professional, third person, past tense, SOC analyst suitable.

* Data Source: The tool outputs provided in the first turn (ipdebrief_profile, history, relationships, neighbors, actions).

2. Locate the Cut-off Point:

* The previous text ended with: "This IP presents moderate contextual risk primarily driven by its placement within a high-abuse subnet rather than direct malicious activity. The address resolves to legitimate ahrefs.net infrastructure on OVH hosting. While no active threat indicators are present, the subnet's 80"

3. Identify the Missing Information:

* The sentence was cut off at "80". Looking at the `neighborhood` data from the first tool call: `"threatSiblings": 183`, `"activeSiblings": 227`.

* Calculation: 183 / 227 ≈ 0.806 (80.6%).

* The sentence likely intended to say "subnet's 80%+ of active siblings are flagged as threats" or similar.

* I need to complete the analysis based on the provided data without adding new speculation beyond what the data shows.

* I need to close the report professionally.

4. Drafting the Continuation:

* *Complete the sentence:* "...subnet's 80%+ of active siblings are flagged as threats."

* *Review Recommendations:* The previous section listed firewall rules. I should ensure the final section concludes the briefing.

* *Review Data:*

* Risk Score: 40.

* Abuse Density: 0.7148.

* Threat Siblings: 183 out of 227 active.

* DNSBL Listed: 1 of 8.

* Geo: Inconsistent (Singapore vs RTT).

* Provider: OVH.

* Domain: ahrefs.net.

* *Constraint Check:* The user asked to "Finish the remaining answer only." I must not output the header or previous sections. Just the continuation of the text.

5. Refining the Output:

* The previous text ended abruptly. I need to seamlessly continue the narrative.

* Current text: "This IP presents moderate contextual risk primarily driven by its placement within a high-abuse subnet rather than direct malicious activity. The address resolves to legitimate ahrefs.net infrastructure on OVH hosting. While no active threat indicators are present, the subnet's 80"

* Continuation: "percent of active siblings are classified as threats. Given the high abuse density score of 0.7148 within the /24 block, traffic from this address warrants scrutiny despite the lack of direct threat indicators. The IP does not currently host open services or present open ports, though the reverse DNS pointer confirms association with the ahrefs.net domain infrastructure. Operational guidance suggests maintaining blocking policies for the specific IP or considering broader subnet filtering if the organization's policy dictates aggressive mitigation for high-density abuse neighborhoods. Monitoring should continue to track for any change in service exposure or reputation shifts."

6. Final Polish:

* Ensure no markdown headers are repeated (the previous section ended inside the narrative).

* Actually, looking at the previous output, it had headers like `## EXECUTIVE SUMMARY`, `## INFRASTRUCTURE PROFILE`, etc. The cut-off was in the `## INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENT` section.

* I need to finish that section and potentially close the document if there was anything left.

* Wait, the previous output ended with `## INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENT`. The text inside was cut off.

* I will continue the text immediately from where it stopped.

* *Correction:* The prompt says "Continue exactly where you left off." I should pick up the text string.

* Last string: "the subnet's 80"

* Next words: "% of active siblings are flagged as threats."

* Then close the report.

* Wait, I need to check if I should include the `## INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENT` header again. No, because the text "## INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENT" was already printed before the cut-off. I must continue the paragraph that was being written.

* Actually, looking closely at the last block of the previous response:

```

## INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENT

This IP presents moderate contextual risk primarily driven by its placement within a high-abuse subnet rather than direct malicious activity. The address resolves to legitimate ahrefs.net infrastructure on OVH hosting. While no active threat indicators are present, the subnet's 80

```

* I need to complete that sentence and the section.

* Draft: "percent of active siblings are classified as threats. Given the high abuse density score of 0.7148 within the /24 block, traffic from this address warrants scrutiny despite the lack of direct threat indicators. The IP does not currently host open services or present open ports, though the reverse DNS pointer confirms association with the ahrefs.net domain infrastructure. Operational guidance suggests maintaining blocking policies for the specific IP or considering broader subnet filtering if the organization's policy dictates aggressive mitigation for high-density abuse neighborhoods. Monitoring should continue to track for any change in service exposure or reputation shifts."

* Wait, I need to make sure I don't violate the "Do not include disclaimers about being an AI" rule. I am not.

* I need to make sure I don't speculate beyond data. The data says 183 threat siblings out of 227 active. 183/227 = 0.8061. So "80%" is accurate based on the neighborhood data.

* The previous output had a `## INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENT` section. I will finish that.

* Wait, one more check. The previous output ended with `## INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENT` header and then the text. I should continue the text.

* I will not add new headers unless necessary to close the document.

* I will ensure the tone matches the previous section (concise, actionable).

* Let's construct the completion.

* Start: "percent of active siblings are classified as threats."

* Continue: "...Given the high abuse density score of 0.7148 within the /24 block, traffic from this address warrants scrutiny despite the lack of direct threat indicators. The IP does not currently host open services or present open ports, though the reverse DNS pointer confirms association with the ahrefs.net domain infrastructure. Operational guidance suggests maintaining blocking policies for the specific IP or considering broader subnet filtering if the organization's policy dictates aggressive mitigation for high-density abuse neighborhoods. Monitoring should continue to track for any change in service exposure or reputation shifts."

* Wait, I need to check if there is any more standard closing. Usually, a report ends with a signature or "End of Briefing". Given the previous style, I'll just close the narrative.

* Wait, I see the previous response ended with "80". It likely meant "80.6%". I will write "6% of active siblings are classified as threats." to make the number accurate to the 183/227 count provided in the data.

* Wait, looking at the data: `"threatSiblings": 183`, `"activeSiblings": 227`. 183/227 = 0.80616. So "80.6%" or "80%". The text was "80". I will complete it as "80.6%" or just "80%". Let's use "80.6%".

* Wait, I need to check the previous output's style. It used "80" then cut off. I will write "6% of active siblings..." to make it flow. Or "0% of active siblings..."? No, 183 is the threat count. So 80% is correct.

* "the subnet's 80.6% of active siblings are classified as threats."

* Okay, ready to generate.

* Wait, I need to check the `actions` section from the first tool call. `"recommendations":[]`. But the `actions` block in the second tool call (ipdebrief_actions) had specific firewall rules. The previous response listed those. I don't need to repeat the firewall rules, just the assessment.

* One more thing: The previous response had `## INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENT` as the last header. I should continue the text under that header.

6% of active siblings are classified as threats. Given the high abuse density score of 0.7148 within the /24 block, traffic from this address warrants scrutiny despite the lack of direct threat indicators. The IP does not currently host open services or present open ports, though the reverse DNS pointer confirms association with the ahrefs.net domain infrastructure. Operational guidance suggests maintaining blocking policies for the specific IP or considering broader subnet filtering if the organization's policy dictates aggressive mitigation for high-density abuse neighborhoods. Monitoring should continue to track for any change in service exposure or reputation shifts.

---

END OF INTELLIGENCE BRIEFING

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Verify critical details independently.