90.82.202.152
IP Intelligence Briefing: 90.82.202.152
*Generated via IPDebrief analytics*
---
**Core Profile**
- Risk Score: Low (0/100)
- Provider/Authority Scores: Neutral (0)
- Geolocation: Conflicting data observed. Initial reports indicated New York, NY (US), but traceroute and DNS resolution showed potential ties to Nice, France. Geolocation consensus is inconclusive.
- Ownership: No registered ASN, organization, or abuse contact detected.
- Threat Indicators: No malicious activity, spam, or known attacker associations.
---
**Observation History**
- Recent Activity:
- Geolocation Discrepancy: Multiple observations show inconsistent geographic data (New York vs. France). This may indicate routing anomalies, misconfigured DNS, or potential spoofing.
- Traceroute: 30-hop path through Comcast networks, with no successful reach to the target.
- DNS: No PTR records, hosted domains, or email authentication (SPF/DKIM) detected.
---
**Network Relationships**
- Connected Entities: No relationships identified (subnets, hostnames, organizations, or certificates).
- Subnet Analysis:
- Neighborhood: 90.82.202.152/24 subnet shows 0% abuse density.
- Neighbors: No high-risk or active sibling IPs detected.
---
**Behavioral & Technical Insights**
- Services: No open ports, TLS certificates, or HTTP services detected.
- Routing: BGP analysis shows no route stability or MOAS (Malicious Origin AS) flags.
- Email Reputation: No email-related threats or SPF/DKIM records.
---
**SOC Recommendations**
1. Monitor Geolocation Consistency: Investigate discrepancies between reported locations (NY vs. France) for potential spoofing or misconfigured infrastructure.
2. Validate DNS Resolution: Confirm DNS records for 90.82.202.152 to rule out domain hijacking or misrouting.
3. Watch for Subnet Changes: Track 90.82.202.152/24 for unexpected neighbor activity or abuse density spikes.
4. Ensure Network Segmentation: Given the lack of services, ensure this IP is not exposed to public-facing assets.
---
*No immediate mitigation required, but ongoing monitoring is advised due to conflicting geolocation data and lack of transparency in ownership.*
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Verify critical details independently.
🏢 Ownership & Registration
| Organization | Administration Adresses |
| ASN | AS3215 |
| Network Name | FR-BILCDS--LB_INTERNET |
| CIDR Block | 90.82.202.152/32 |
| RIR | RIPE |
| Country | FR |
| Abuse Contact | Available via RDAP |
🌐 DNS Intelligence
| PTR Record | No PTR |
| Forward Confirmed | No — PTR hostname does not resolve back to this IP (weak signal) |
🔐 DNS Hygiene
| Hygiene Score | 20% (Poor) |
| SPF | Not configured |
| DMARC | Not configured |
| FCrDNS | Not verified |
| DNSSEC | Valid |
| CAA | Not configured |
☁️ Network Classification
| Infrastructure | Mobile |
| Service Purpose | Firewalled / No Services |
| Network Tier | Unknown — Insufficient routing data to classify |
🔌 Services & Open Ports
| Port | Service | Protocol | Banner |
|---|---|---|---|
| No open ports detected | |||
| Server | — |
| HTTP Title | — |
🔐 TLS Certificate
| SANs | None |
| Valid From | — |
| Valid Until | — |
🎯 Confidence Breakdown
Per-dimension confidence scores based on source diversity and data freshness
| Dimension | Score | Sources | Observations |
|---|---|---|---|
| threat | 0% | 0 | 0 |
| routing | 0% | 0 | 0 |
| services | 0% | 0 | 0 |
| ownership | 0% | 0 | 0 |
| reputation | 0% | 0 | 0 |
| geolocation | 25% | 1 | 1 |
| Overall | 4% | 1 | 1 |
| Data Coherence | Consistent (100%) |
| Attribution | Moderate (50%) |
| OwnershipFCrDNSGeo ConsensusGeo PlausibleIRR MatchRPKI Valid |
📅 Observation Timeline 🔄 Live
| First Seen | 2026-06-05 13:15:02 UTC |
| Last Seen | 2026-06-19 11:34:23 UTC |
| Profile Built | 2026-06-13 06:12:24 UTC |
| Data Freshness | Live |
| Signal Types | 17 |
| Total Observations | 17 |
Full dossier details are available via our API.