Blue Team — Operational Summary
Over a 3-hour window, arc-codex.com received 12,040 external requests from 776 unique IPs, with 99.9% originating from non-datacenter sources. Traffic was dominated by bot/crawler activity (1,596 sessions), while likely-human sessions were minimal (3 total, 2 engaged). Operator activity accounted for 215 requests from a single IP. The top three IPs contributed 1,731 requests (~14% of total), with no single source exceeding 9% of traffic. HTTP 200 responses dominated (98.6%), with negligible errors (59 404s, 8 502s). Exploit attempts (22 requests) targeted common CMS vulnerabilities (WordPress, .git, .env), but no successful breaches were indicated. Referral traffic was negligible (10 total from Facebook). The pattern aligns with typical low-traffic, bot-heavy internet background noise, with no evidence of targeted attacks or operational anomalies.
Red Team — Facts Only
Time window: 2026-05-25 06:00–09:11 MDT (3 hours, 11 minutes).
Total external requests: 12,040 from 776 unique IPs.
Operator activity: 215 requests from 1 IP (38.175.170.87).
Datacenter traffic: 0.1% of external requests.
Likely-human sessions: 3 (real browser UA, non-datacenter IP, referrer/direct visit).
Engaged sessions: 2 (≥1 article page, ≥30s duration).
Bot/crawler sessions: 1,596.
Top referrers: m.facebook.com (8), facebook.com (2).
Top IPs by volume: 74.7.241.22 (1,041 req), 216.73.216.51 (694 req), 216.244.66.198 (296 req).
HTTP status codes: 200 (11,866), 206 (2), 308 (105), 404 (59), 502 (8).
Exploit attempts: 22 requests from 4 IPs (35.239.90.70, 104.23.221.162, 5.255.104.83).
Exploit patterns: /xmlrpc.php?rsd, /wp-admin/install.php, /.git/config, /.env.bak.
Purple Team — Pattern Analysis
Operational baseline: Traffic composition is consistent with internet background radiation—high bot volume, minimal human engagement, and negligible errors. The 22 exploit attempts are routine probing (WordPress, .git, .env), not targeted. No evidence of follow-up activity or successful exploitation.
Signal extraction: The only subset worth attention is the exploit attempts, but they match generic, automated scanning. The top IPs (74.7.241.22, etc.) show no adversarial patterns—likely crawlers or misconfigured clients.
Adversarial lens: If staging occurred, we’d expect clustered IPs, repeated paths, or timing patterns. Here, exploit attempts are scattered (4 IPs, 5 paths) with no persistence. No alignment with adversarial fingerprint.
Resource implications: No bandwidth or compute strain indicated. The 502 errors (8 total) suggest transient upstream issues, but too sparse to warrant action.
Watch list for next window: Monitor repeat exploit attempts from the same IPs (35.239.90.70, 104.23.221.162, 5.255.104.83) and track 502 error rates. If either increases, investigate further.