城市(city): unknown
省份(region): unknown
国家(country): None
运营商(isp): unknown
主机名(hostname): unknown
机构(organization): unknown
使用类型(Usage Type): unknown
b; <<>> DiG 9.10.3-P4-Ubuntu <<>> 104.21.12.50
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 38166
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;104.21.12.50. IN A
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
. 246 IN SOA a.root-servers.net. nstld.verisign-grs.com. 2022021702 1800 900 604800 86400
;; Query time: 166 msec
;; SERVER: 183.60.83.19#53(183.60.83.19)
;; WHEN: Fri Feb 18 08:30:24 CST 2022
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 105Host 50.12.21.104.in-addr.arpa. not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)Server: 183.60.83.19
Address: 183.60.83.19#53
** server can't find 50.12.21.104.in-addr.arpa: NXDOMAIN| IP | 类型 | 评论内容 | 时间 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 59.48.174.6 | attack | 1433/tcp 1433/tcp 1433/tcp... [2020-08-11/10-01]4pkt,1pt.(tcp) |
2020-10-03 06:34:08 |
| 1.255.48.197 | attack | (From annabelle@merchantpay.top) I have a quick question about working with your business. Like most business owners you just want to survive through to 2021. In order for that to happen you need to save every dollar possible right? This is an honest question, would you continue with the high credit card processing fees if there was another way? New laws are on your side. Test this newly released card processing model this October - just send a phone number and we'll call. $24.99/mo Flat Fee Credit Card Processing (Unlimited) 1) As a small business owner accepting credit/debit, recently passed State Laws are on your side. - Were you aware? New state regulations now in effect, the law was successfully passed in 46 states - effective since August 2019. Since that date you shouldn't be paying above 0.75% Credit Card Processing Fees. 2) You're legally able to demand this new option. Bottom Line: Your processor isn't telling you everything. Why are they hiding the lower fee options? We repre |
2020-10-03 06:58:51 |
| 159.89.49.238 | attackbots | Invalid user info from 159.89.49.238 port 57490 |
2020-10-03 06:28:10 |
| 41.38.50.50 | attack | Found on CINS badguys / proto=6 . srcport=54914 . dstport=1433 . (4293) |
2020-10-03 06:40:59 |
| 157.230.245.91 | attack | srv02 Mass scanning activity detected Target: 22397 .. |
2020-10-03 07:08:46 |
| 51.195.47.153 | attack | Invalid user ram from 51.195.47.153 port 36306 |
2020-10-03 07:01:14 |
| 83.233.41.228 | attackspambots | Lines containing failures of 83.233.41.228 Oct 1 11:28:39 jarvis sshd[31903]: Invalid user hacker from 83.233.41.228 port 54784 Oct 1 11:28:39 jarvis sshd[31903]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=83.233.41.228 Oct 1 11:28:41 jarvis sshd[31903]: Failed password for invalid user hacker from 83.233.41.228 port 54784 ssh2 Oct 1 11:28:42 jarvis sshd[31903]: Received disconnect from 83.233.41.228 port 54784:11: Bye Bye [preauth] Oct 1 11:28:42 jarvis sshd[31903]: Disconnected from invalid user hacker 83.233.41.228 port 54784 [preauth] Oct 1 11:39:37 jarvis sshd[765]: Invalid user spotlight from 83.233.41.228 port 35076 Oct 1 11:39:37 jarvis sshd[765]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=83.233.41.228 Oct 1 11:39:39 jarvis sshd[765]: Failed password for invalid user spotlight from 83.233.41.228 port 35076 ssh2 Oct 1 11:39:39 jarvis sshd[765]: Received disconnect........ ------------------------------ |
2020-10-03 06:46:23 |
| 203.142.70.26 | attackspam | 445/tcp 445/tcp 445/tcp... [2020-08-29/10-01]4pkt,1pt.(tcp) |
2020-10-03 06:29:16 |
| 119.45.46.159 | attack | Oct 3 00:00:36 vpn01 sshd[11557]: Failed password for root from 119.45.46.159 port 48192 ssh2 ... |
2020-10-03 07:01:33 |
| 179.197.71.132 | attack | 1601671289 - 10/02/2020 22:41:29 Host: 179.197.71.132/179.197.71.132 Port: 445 TCP Blocked |
2020-10-03 07:02:00 |
| 188.131.131.59 | attackspam | SSH bruteforce |
2020-10-03 06:51:04 |
| 190.156.238.155 | attackbots | Oct 2 23:45:34 server sshd[50753]: Failed password for invalid user user1 from 190.156.238.155 port 43246 ssh2 Oct 2 23:49:29 server sshd[51689]: Failed password for invalid user celery from 190.156.238.155 port 50726 ssh2 Oct 2 23:53:23 server sshd[52466]: Failed password for root from 190.156.238.155 port 58214 ssh2 |
2020-10-03 06:43:07 |
| 152.136.97.217 | attack | Oct 2 20:24:59 Server1 sshd[17048]: Invalid user wellington from 152.136.97.217 port 52798 Oct 2 20:24:59 Server1 sshd[17048]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=152.136.97.217 Oct 2 20:25:01 Server1 sshd[17048]: Failed password for invalid user wellington from 152.136.97.217 port 52798 ssh2 Oct 2 20:25:01 Server1 sshd[17048]: Connection closed by invalid user wellington 152.136.97.217 port 52798 [preauth] Oct 2 20:25:02 Server1 sshd[17050]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=152.136.97.217 user=r.r ........ ----------------------------------------------- https://www.blocklist.de/en/view.html?ip=152.136.97.217 |
2020-10-03 06:53:06 |
| 122.155.223.59 | attackspam | SSH Invalid Login |
2020-10-03 06:48:46 |
| 176.109.184.235 | attackbotsspam | Automated report (2020-10-03T00:30:09+02:00). Spambot detected. |
2020-10-03 06:52:08 |