wilderness
msg:4538860 | 7:31 am on Jan 24, 2013 (gmt 0) |
Versaweb (old thread [webmasterworld.com])
76.164.196.194 - - [Thu Jan 24 06:22:51 2013] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 403 0 "-" "-"
VWEB-208-64-24 208.64.24.0 - 208.64.31.255 208.64.24.0/21
VWEB-208-66-72 208.66.72.0 - 208.66.79.255 208.66.72.0/21
VWEB-72-46-128 72.46.128.0 - 72.46.159.255 72.46.128.0/19
VWEB-76-164-192 76.164.192.0 - 76.164.239.255 76.164.224.0/20 76.164.192.0/19
|
keyplyr
msg:4538863 | 8:06 am on Jan 24, 2013 (gmt 0) |
Thanks wilderness
|
not2easy
msg:4540280 | 7:16 pm on Jan 29, 2013 (gmt 0) |
I couldn't find anything on INTERBUSINESS less than 10 years old so I thought I would add these here. Please move them if there is somewhere else for this.
I am seeing more activity from INTERBUSINESS, TDENET and RIMA - yes, Rima and TDEnet are telecommunications networks in Spain with legitimate users. The sites they are hitting don't do anything intl so they are blocked:
79.14.0.0 - 79.14.127.255 TELECOM-INTERBUSINESS (IT) 79.14.0.0/16
79.28.128.0 - 79.28.255.255 TELECOM-INTERBUSINESS (IT) 79.28.0.0/16
79.29.128.0 - 79.29.255.255 TELECOM-INTERBUSINESS (IT) 79.29.0.0/16
80.28.128.0 - 80.28.255.255 TDENET (ES) 80.28.0.0/16
80.32.0.0 - 80.35.255.255 RIMA (ES) 80.33.0.0/16
80.36.0.0 - 80.39.255.255 RIMA (ES) 80.36.0.0/16
All of these all well as a few others I'm still checking on are from the past two weeks' access logs for one relatively new WP install and they ALL had the same UA:
"Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:8.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/8.0.1"
..and they were all programmed hack attacks: POST /wp-login.php
|
keyplyr
msg:4540302 | 8:15 pm on Jan 29, 2013 (gmt 0) |
IMO this forum "Search Engine Spider and User Agent Identification Forum" is for new Search Engines or company/cooperate IP ranges and user agents that may be considered questionable, not for telecom/ISPs that may have a pesky user probing forum or blog security. That's dealt with more on an individual basis.
|
blend27
msg:4540389 | 1:10 am on Jan 30, 2013 (gmt 0) |
@keyplyr
I think this thread in particular keeps the "Search Engine" part out of the formula replacing it with "Server Farms, .. and more"..
I have to admit that I personally profited(mentally) from this thing going on and on and on...
I am sure that there are a lot of newbies(or oldies) that lurk in this part of the Woods from time to time started understanding on a more granular level what scraping means to them just based on this thread.
Blend27
|
wilderness
msg:4540396 | 1:56 am on Jan 30, 2013 (gmt 0) |
| IMO this forum "Search Engine Spider and User Agent Identification Forum" is for new Search Engines or company/cooperate IP ranges and user agents that may be considered questionable, not for telecom/ISPs that may have a pesky user probing forum or blog security. That's dealt with more on an individual basis. |
|
keyplr,
This forum from it's inception (more than a decade ago) (you been here and this should not need any clarification) has been very broad in parameters and has really NEVER followed the forum charters guidelines.
There was even a time when Apache was a primary topic here.
Don
|
keyplyr
msg:4540427 | 4:38 am on Jan 30, 2013 (gmt 0) |
As I said, IMO = In My Opinion.
I guess my point is... reporting some guy on an ISP trying to hack into your forum is a personal issue, not reason to post the entire range of the ISP here at WW. I get these guys on a daily basis, but I don't post the ranges of Comcast or Cox Cable.
More specifically, it's doubtful they will still be on that provider a day or two from now.
And I too have benefited from this and other threads, contributing when I can. I don't see what that has to do with what I said. I'm not condemning the thread, just listing ISPs.
Hey, maybe I'm just cranky today... having spent $3k on trademark legal defense a hour ago.
|
wilderness
msg:4540680 | 7:17 pm on Jan 30, 2013 (gmt 0) |
NOC4Hosts
blend mentions them in this 2008 thread [webmasterworld.com]
Had the following today:
68.233.255.144 - - [Wed Jan 30 18:13:12 2013] "GET /robots.txt HTTP/1.1" 200 2797 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.01; Windows NT 4.0)"
NOC4HOSTS2 74.50.96.0 - 74.50.127.255 74.50.96.0/19
NOC4HOSTS 199.167.144.0 - 199.167.151.255 199.167.144.0/21
NOC4HOST 198.178.120.0 - 198.178.127.255 198.178.120.0/21
NOC4HOSTS1 68.233.224.0 - 68.233.255.255 68.233.224.0/19
NOC4HOSTS 206.51.224.0 - 206.51.239.255 206.51.224.0/20
NOC4HOSTS1 66.232.96.0 - 66.232.127.255 66.232.96.0/19
NOC4HOST 199.119.100.0 - 199.119.103.255 199.119.100.0/22
NOC4HOSTS1 96.31.64.0 - 96.31.95.255 96.31.64.0/19
NOC4HOST 199.193.112.0 - 199.193.119.255 199.193.112.0/21
|
dstiles
msg:4540742 | 9:41 pm on Jan 30, 2013 (gmt 0) |
Thanks - didn't have 3 of those! :)
|
blend27
msg:4540754 | 10:32 pm on Jan 30, 2013 (gmt 0) |
@keyplyr
| reporting some guy on an ISP trying to hack into your forum is a personal issue |
|
I'll share a personal story here;
Last year I picked up 2 ranges(ISP - comcast/rr) via "to fast scraper block script". Searched the IP in Gorg, one of the theads from WebmasterWorld/this_forum came up. Blocked it on the spot.
Week later found out that one of my customers(dev work) was contacted by an SEO company promising them reaches. SEO company tried to run several custom made stealth tools from Comcast Biz IP Ranges to analyze the site to move on with their kakamimia proposals after I blocked the ranges.
They have approach the client from the angle that I would never pitch. Gorg related, but I wont go into it.
Saved myself a client and got a present for Chanukah.. :)
Just an example.
|
keyplyr
msg:4540761 | 11:10 pm on Jan 30, 2013 (gmt 0) |
@blend27 - shall I start listing all ISP ranges from script kiddies, admin.php probes, bogus login attempts ... how about favicon thieves, hot-linking forums?
IMO - This forum is only an asset if it's focused on specific types of threats coming from company ranges that may have negative effects for other webmasters. Reporting some guy on an ISP causing problems on your site is most likely specific to your site alone and not reason to post the entire range of the ISP here at WW.
Nefarious UAs yes, server/colo/data-center ranges yes, new bots yes, because these are the types that affect us all. But as I said above, listing ISPs is not only useless for other webmasters since it is usually a one-time event, but in all probability misleading for those lurking newbies you mention.
@wilderness - thanks for the additional NOC4Hosts ranges. I was missing a couple of those :)
|
keyplyr
msg:4541037 | 6:49 pm on Jan 31, 2013 (gmt 0) |
Peer1.net Hosting
65.39.128.0 - 65.39.255.255
65.39.128.0/17
76.74.128.0 - 76.74.255.255
76.74.128.0/17
Any more?
|
wilderness
msg:4541088 | 9:07 pm on Jan 31, 2013 (gmt 0) |
Peer1 [whois.arin.net]
|
dstiles
msg:4541121 | 10:40 pm on Jan 31, 2013 (gmt 0) |
Any More... US, CA and GB...
(note: some ranges include other server providers' sub-ranges)
(the list is almost certainly incomplete)
64.34.0.0-64.34.255.255
64.45.0.0-64.45.63.255
64.65.0.0-64.65.63.255
64.224.0.0-64.227.255.255
65.39.128.0-65.39.255.255
66.33.0.0-66.33.127.255
66.111.64.0-66.111.95.255
66.132.128.0-66.132.255.255
66.199.128.0-66.199.191.255
66.234.0.0-66.234.15.255
67.211.192.0-67.211.207.255
69.0.128.0-69.0.255.255
69.28.192.0-69.28.255.255
69.90.0.0-69.90.255.255
69.172.192.0-69.172.255.255
70.33.192.0-70.33.255.255
72.51.0.0-72.51.63.255
76.74.128.0-76.74.255.255
83.222.224.0-83.222.255.255
107.6.0.0-107.6.63.255
176.74.160.0-176.74.191.255
198.244.48.0-198.244.63.255
209.25.128.0-209.25.255.255
209.203.224.0-209.203.255.255
209.213.96.0-209.213.127.255
216.25.0.0-216.25.127.255
216.65.0.0-216.65.127.255
216.122.0.0-216.122.255.255
216.150.0.0-216.150.31.255
216.152.128.0-216.152.143.255
216.157.0.0-216.157.111.255
216.195.32.0-216.195.63.255
|
keyplyr
msg:4541170 | 2:38 am on Feb 1, 2013 (gmt 0) |
Thanks
| some ranges include other server providers' sub-ranges |
|
Yes, that's what led me to Peer1. They're a reseller that hosts resellers,
like one of those M.C.Escher drawings :)
|
blend27
msg:4542014 | 2:23 pm on Feb 3, 2013 (gmt 0) |
Just caught a crawl attempt from CODERO IPs.
Requests are made from several IPs, 1 second interval.
216.55.161.64
216.55.164.20
206.225.81.153
206.225.81.153
206.225.82.23
216.55.181.182
206.225.94.38
216.55.137.46
216.55.170.28
206.225.93.187
206.225.85.218
206.225.85.162
216.55.181.242
206.225.83.217
216.55.162.116
216.55.161.64
216.55.170.28
With the Same UA: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:14.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/14.0.1
No supporting files, no robots.txt.
Now the interesting part, all IPs when visited redirect to the same shopping site(dudool). The crawler excepts and keeps http Cookie, passes it back on the next visit and provides valid site referrers.
But the bot runner still does not know that his crawler spits out headers that are not humanly possible, all though it really looks like a human visit when looking at the headers.
|
keyplyr
msg:4542107 | 9:14 pm on Feb 3, 2013 (gmt 0) |
I also had this one:
Coldero Hosting
216.55.128.0 - 216.55.191.255
216.55.128.0/18
|
dstiles
msg:4542132 | 10:43 pm on Feb 3, 2013 (gmt 0) |
Codero:
64.150.176.0 - 64.150.191.255
68.168.96.0 - 68.168.111.255
69.64.64.0 - 69.64.95.255
206.225.80.0 - 206.225.95.255
216.55.128.0 - 216.55.191.255
This list is probably incomplete and I seem to recall a few others ranges either belong to codero or vice versa.
|
wilderness
msg:4542767 | 3:20 am on Feb 6, 2013 (gmt 0) |
Steadfast Networks
67.202.90.137 - - [Wed Feb 06 02:41:47 2013] "GET /Myfoleder/MySub/MyPage.html HTTP/1.0" 200 28945 "http://www.example.com/" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:5.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/5.02"
67.202.90.137 - - [Wed Feb 06 02:41:53 2013] "GET /SameFolder/SameSub/SamePage.html HTTP/1.0" 200 28945 "http://www.example.com/" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:5.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/5.02"
no supporting files. No robots.
Had a visit from one of their other ranges in October for a different page and folder.
STEADFAST-2 208.100.0.0 - 208.100.63.255 208.100.0.0/18
STEADFAST-5 208.117.0.0 - 208.117.63.255 208.117.0.0/18
STEADFAST-FASTROOT 208.66.168.0 - 208.66.175.255 208.66.168.0/21
STEADFAST-1 216.86.144.0 - 216.86.159.255 216.86.144.0/20
STEADFAST-7 23.29.128.0 - 23.29.159.255 23.29.128.0/19
STEADFAST-6 50.31.0.0 - 50.31.127.255 50.31.0.0/17
STEADFAST-3 67.202.64.0 - 67.202.127.255 67.202.64.0/18
STEADFAST-4 69.162.128.0 - 69.162.191.255 69.162.128.0/18
STEADFAST 2607:F128:: - 2607:F128:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF
|
wilderness
msg:4544000 | 12:06 am on Feb 9, 2013 (gmt 0) |
I'm sure I'm not the only that has seen this.
Checked for WP vulnerabilities four times in a short period, and from four different Class C's.
Pfui mentioned in this thread [webmasterworld.com]
69.163.240.77 - - [Fri Feb 08 21:45:26 2013] "GET /wp-admin/ HTTP/1.1" 403 0 "-" "-"
Dreamhost
DREAMHOST-BLK10 173.236.128.0 - 173.236.255.255 173.236.128.0/17
DREAMHOST-BLK3 205.196.208.0 - 205.196.223.255 205.196.208.0/20
DREAMHOST-BLK5 208.97.128.0 - 208.97.191.255 208.97.128.0/18
DREAMHOST-BLK6 208.113.128.0 - 208.113.255.255 208.113.128.0/17
DREAMHOST-BLK10 64.90.32.0 - 64.90.63.255 64.90.32.0/19
DREAMHOST-BLK4 64.111.96.0 - 64.111.127.255 64.111.96.0/19
DREAMHOST-BLK1 66.33.192.0 - 66.33.223.255 66.33.192.0/19
DREAMHOST-BLK7 67.205.0.0 - 67.205.63.255 67.205.0.0/18
DREAMHOST-BLK9 69.163.128.0 - 69.163.255.255 69.163.128.0/17
DREAMHOST-BLK8 75.119.192.0 - 75.119.223.255 75.119.192.0/19
DREAMHOST-V6-BLK1 2607:F298:: - 2607:F298:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF
|
keyplyr
msg:4544009 | 12:41 am on Feb 9, 2013 (gmt 0) |
Just a heads-up for those who use the online Wannabrowser.com utility:
Their IP is 69.163.178.111 which is DreamHost (69.163.128.0 - 69.163.255.255)
|
wilderness
msg:4545829 | 5:06 am on Feb 15, 2013 (gmt 0) |
Not sure about this one.
I've grouped two of the blocks into larger ranges.
Hostigation
206.253.164.0/22
HOSTIG-1-ARAC1 206.253.164.0 - 206.253.165.255 206.253.164.0/23
HOSTIG-1-ARACH2 206.253.166.0 - 206.253.166.255 206.253.166.0/24
HOSTIG-1-ARACH3 206.253.167.0 - 206.253.167.255 206.253.167.0/24
HSW-216-189-1-0-255 216.189.1.0 - 216.189.1.255 216.189.1.0/24
HSW-216-189-8-0-255 216.189.8.0 - 216.189.8.255 216.189.8.0/24
216-189-101-0-24-HSW 216.189.101.0 - 216.189.101.255 216.189.101.0/24
69.85.64.0/19
HOSTG-GVII4 69.85.84.0 - 69.85.85.255 69.85.84.0/23
HOSTG-GVII3 69.85.86.0 - 69.85.87.255 69.85.86.0/23
HOSTG-GVII2 69.85.88.0 - 69.85.89.255 69.85.88.0/23
HOSTG-GVII26 69.85.91.0 - 69.85.91.255 69.85.91.0/24
HOSTG-GVII1 69.85.92.0 - 69.85.93.255 69.85.92.0/23
HOSTG-GVII25 69.85.95.0 - 69.85.95.255 69.85.95.0/24
HOSTIG-I6-1-ARACH 2606:DF00:2:: - 2606:DF00:2:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF
HOSTIG-I6-2-ARACH 2606:DF00:3:: - 2606:DF00:3:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF
|
keyplyr
msg:4545836 | 6:38 am on Feb 15, 2013 (gmt 0) |
I think 206.253.164.0 - 206.253.165.255 is 206.253.164.0/23 (not /22)
arachnitec.com is 206.253.160.0 - 206.253.167.255 206.253.160.0/21
and I get Grand Valley Internet (http://gvin.com/) for 69.85.64.0 - 69.85.95.255 69.85.64.0/19 which offers data services for businesses, but the only relation to Hostigation is an arachnitec.com contact email address.
Thoughts?
|
wilderness
msg:4545837 | 6:51 am on Feb 15, 2013 (gmt 0) |
keyplr,
look at the hostnames for GrandValley:
EX:
HOSTG-GVII
It appears there is some relationship with host being the backbone.
|
keyplyr
msg:4545841 | 7:26 am on Feb 15, 2013 (gmt 0) |
keyplr,
look at the hostnames for GrandValley:
EX:HOSTG-GVII
It appears there is some relationship with host being the backbone. |
|
I don't see it written that way where I checked (I couldn't connect to ARIN) but I'll take your word for it.
Whadoya think about arachnitec.com?
|
wilderness
msg:4545887 | 12:32 pm on Feb 15, 2013 (gmt 0) |
keyplr,
It looks to fit this theme as well.
|
dstiles
msg:4545977 | 8:38 pm on Feb 15, 2013 (gmt 0) |
216.189.0.0/17 is highspeedweb - blocked here. It includes one or more hostigation sub-ranges.
69.85.64.0/19 is grand valley internet (includes hostigation) - looks server-ish to me but no previous blocking within the range.
|
keyplyr
msg:4546001 | 10:43 pm on Feb 15, 2013 (gmt 0) |
Whadoya think about arachnitec.com?
keyplr,
It looks to fit this theme as well. |
|
|
|
I meant that it looks more like Hostigation is a sub-range of Arachnitec. Hostigation tech contact evens uses an Arachnitec email address.
Doesn't make much difference I guess.
|
wilderness
msg:4546013 | 11:08 pm on Feb 15, 2013 (gmt 0) |
| Doesn't make much difference I guess. |
|
A farm is still a farm when the pigs are loose ;)
|
wilderness
msg:4546256 | 3:59 am on Feb 17, 2013 (gmt 0) |
There's an old thread on this [webmasterworld.com] by keyplr
Vivid Hosting
VIVID-HOSTING-4 192.154.192.0 - 192.154.255.255 192.154.192.0/18
VIVID-HOSTING-2 192.158.224.0 - 192.158.239.255 192.158.224.0/20
VIVID-HOSTING-3 198.37.96.0 - 198.37.127.255 198.37.96.0/19
VIVID-HOSTING-1 198.177.120.0 - 198.177.127.255 198.177.120.0/21
VIVID-HOSTING 199.188.88.0 - 199.188.95.255 199.188.88.0/21
VIVID-HOSTING-NET 209.133.107.128 - 209.133.107.255 209.133.107.128/25
MZIMA07-CUST-VIVID02 68.64.128.0 - 68.64.129.255 68.64.128.0/23
MZIMA07-CUST-VIVID01 68.64.136.0 - 68.64.137.255 68.64.136.0/23
|
keyplyr
msg:4546259 | 4:34 am on Feb 17, 2013 (gmt 0) |
There's an old thread on this [webmasterworld.com] by keyplr
Vivid Hosting
VIVID-HOSTING-4 192.154.192.0 - 192.154.255.255 192.154.192.0/18
VIVID-HOSTING-2 192.158.224.0 - 192.158.239.255 192.158.224.0/20
VIVID-HOSTING-3 198.37.96.0 - 198.37.127.255 198.37.96.0/19
VIVID-HOSTING-1 198.177.120.0 - 198.177.127.255 198.177.120.0/21
VIVID-HOSTING 199.188.88.0 - 199.188.95.255 199.188.88.0/21
VIVID-HOSTING-NET 209.133.107.128 - 209.133.107.255 209.133.107.128/25
MZIMA07-CUST-VIVID02 68.64.128.0 - 68.64.129.255 68.64.128.0/23
MZIMA07-CUST-VIVID01 68.64.136.0 - 68.64.137.255 68.64.136.0/23
|
|
So it appears the range I identified in that old thread:
68.64.128.0 - 68.64.191.255
68.64.128.0/18
is now operated by PacketExchange
As is this one:
68.64.128.0 - 68.64.191.255
68.64.128.0/18
And this is AboveNet:
209.133.0.0 - 209.133.127.255
209.133.0.0/17
|
| This 169 message thread spans 6 pages: < < 169 ( 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 ) > > |
|
|
