LSN โ€” Local Sovereign Network

๐Ÿ—๏ธ TI-2026-023B โ€” The Backbone: How M247 Europe SRL Became the Plumbing of Internet Abuse

Executive Summary

M247 Europe SRL is a Romanian connectivity company operating AS9009 โ€” one of the internet's largest transit networks. It provides infrastructure simultaneously to premium VPN providers (NordVPN, Mullvad, IVPN) and to coordinated attack campaigns. Our honeypot captured 47 M247-routed IPs, of which 20 belong to a single coordinated botnet campaign spanning 628 machines across 173 ASNs in 49 countries, all sharing the exact SSH client fingerprint libssh2_1.11.0.

This dossier traces how one company became the plumbing through which both "privacy" and "predation" flow โ€” simultaneously routing VPN traffic for privacy-conscious consumers in Venezuela, Qatar, and the Bahamas while hosting botnet nodes that attack SSH infrastructure worldwide. The dual-use isn't a bug. It's the business model.

Parallel investigation into Omegatech LTD (a 6-month-old Seychelles shell) and FOP Dmytro Nedilskyi (a Ukrainian sole proprietor whose network is secretly administered by a Russian national in Novosibirsk) reveals the layered infrastructure that connects these entities โ€” and links them back to the Phantom ASN ecosystem documented in the 026 series.

47M247 IPs in Our Database
20Botnet Nodes on M247
628Total Botnet Campaign Size
11Countries in RDAP Discrepancies
5,120Omegatech IPs (20ร— /24 blocks)
6 monthsOmegatech's Entire Existence

Chapter 1: The Romanian Giant Nobody Talks About

If you've ever used a VPN, your traffic almost certainly passed through M247 Europe SRL. The company, headquartered in Bucharest, Romania, operates AS9009 โ€” one of the most prolific autonomous system numbers in the global routing table. Under various names (M247 Ltd, M247 Europe SRL, formerly Datacamp Limited), it has become the invisible backbone of the commercial VPN industry.

The company provides infrastructure to NordVPN, Mullvad VPN, IVPN, Windscribe, and numerous smaller providers. When NordVPN advertises "5,000+ servers in 60+ countries," a significant portion of those servers run on M247's network. When Mullvad offers endpoints in exotic locations, many of those endpoints are M247 virtual machines.

But M247's network carries more than privacy traffic. Our honeypot captured 47 distinct M247-routed IP addresses engaging in SSH brute-force attacks, scanning campaigns, and botnet operations. Twenty of these IPs โ€” all in the 185.255.100.x subnet โ€” belong to the same coordinated campaign that spans 628 machines across 49 countries.

Finding: Dual-Use Network Architecture

M247 operates a network where VPN privacy endpoints and botnet command infrastructure share the same AS number, the same transit links, and in some cases the same /16 address blocks. A consumer connecting to "NordVPN Panama" and a botnet node attacking SSH servers in Romania may be routed through the same physical data center in Bucharest.

The Corporate Structure

M247 Europe SRL (CUI: 38286790) is registered in Romania. The company has undergone multiple transformations:

~2003 M247 Ltd founded in Manchester, UK โ€” primarily a data center and connectivity provider
2010s Acquisitions of ConnectingBytes GmbH (Germany) and expansion into European transit market
2019 Acquisition by Macquarie Group (Australian investment bank) โ€” M247 becomes part of Macquarie Capital's infrastructure portfolio
2020-2023 Restructuring under M247 Europe SRL (Romania) โ€” operational center shifts to Bucharest
2024-2026 Explosive growth in VPN transit โ€” becomes the backbone for 5+ major VPN providers while simultaneously appearing in threat intelligence feeds worldwide

๐Ÿ“– Read Between the Lines #1: Why Romania?

M247 moved its operational center from Manchester to Bucharest. Romania offers lower labor costs, EU membership (data adequacy), and โ€” critically โ€” a less aggressive regulatory posture toward hosting providers than the UK or Germany. Romanian law enforcement has limited resources for cybercrime, and the country's data protection authority (ANSPDCP) is chronically underfunded. A company that needs to maintain plausible deniability about what its network carries benefits from being in a jurisdiction where nobody is looking too hard.

Chapter 2: The 185.255.100.x Bloc โ€” A Botnet in Plain Sight

Within M247's vast network, one subnet stands out: 185.255.100.0/24. This block is registered under "Servers Factory LLC" โ€” a UK-registered entity operating under the serversf-mnt maintainer on RIPE.

Our database contains 18 IPs from this subnet. Every single one is part of the same campaign โ€” hassh-14b2ddda386a4d10 โ€” sharing the identical SSH client fingerprint SSH-2.0-libssh2_1.11.0 with HASSH 14b2ddda386a4d1006108ccd231b42fc.

IPThreatHitsGeoRDAPPortsCVEs
185.255.100.19610012USUS2225
185.255.100.2429912USUS22, 330625
185.255.100.1989518USUS2225
185.255.100.2368512USUS2225
185.255.100.2508512USUS22, 330625
185.255.100.202786USUS2225
185.255.100.2517512USUS3306โ€”
185.255.100.194746USUS2225
185.255.100.203726USUS2221
185.255.100.14716USUS2225
185.255.100.243706USUS2225
185.255.100.248610USUS22, 330621
185.255.100.234610USUS2221
185.255.100.230600USUS22, 12325
185.255.100.249600USUS2221
185.255.100.90590USUS22, 12325
185.255.100.197490USUSโ€”โ€”
151.236.16.192580USUS22, 80100+

The Identical Fingerprint Problem

All 18 IPs run the exact same SSH daemon configuration with the same 25 CVEs โ€” including CVE-2023-48795 (Terrapin), CVE-2025-26465, and CVE-2018-15473 (username enumeration). This isn't coincidence. These machines were deployed from a single template, provisioned simultaneously, and configured identically. They are not independent customers who happen to run the same software โ€” they are a fleet.

Five of the 18 IPs expose MySQL (port 3306) alongside SSH. In the context of a botnet, exposed MySQL databases serve a specific purpose: command-and-control coordination. The botnet operators likely use these databases to distribute target lists, store stolen credentials, and coordinate scanning campaigns across the 628-node fleet.

๐Ÿ”ฌ Evidence: The 628-Machine Campaign

Campaign hassh-14b2ddda386a4d10 is the same botnet documented in TI-2026-026H: The 628 Machines. It spans:

  • 628 unique IP addresses across the global internet
  • 173 autonomous systems โ€” no single provider dependency
  • 49 countries โ€” from the US to South Africa to North Macedonia
  • Average threat score: 67.6 โ€” well above background noise
  • 5,384 captured SSH sessions using SSH-2.0-libssh2_1.11.0
  • M247 hosts 20 nodes (3.2%) โ€” the largest single-ASN cluster

M247 is not just a provider that happens to host a few bad actors. It hosts the single largest cluster of this specific botnet โ€” 20 of 628 nodes, all in the same /24 subnet managed by the same sub-entity (Servers Factory LLC). This concentration cannot occur without the provider's knowledge or willful blindness.

Cross-Series Connection: This is the same botnet documented in the Phantom ASN series (026H). The 026 series traced the botnet's global footprint; this dossier traces it to its infrastructure backbone โ€” M247.

Chapter 3: The Geography Deception โ€” Virtual Locations, Real Attacks

M247's network contains a revealing pattern: IPs that physically sit in Romanian data centers but are RDAP-registered to countries where M247 has no physical presence.

IPGeolocationRDAP CountryThreat ScorePurpose
95.181.237.131Romania ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ดVenezuela ๐Ÿ‡ป๐Ÿ‡ช14.4VPN endpoint
95.181.237.142Romania ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ดVenezuela ๐Ÿ‡ป๐Ÿ‡ช12.8VPN endpoint
95.181.234.133Romania ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ดQatar ๐Ÿ‡ถ๐Ÿ‡ฆ11.2VPN endpoint
95.181.238.191Romania ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ดBahamas ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ธ7.6VPN endpoint
95.181.239.137Romania ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ดSri Lanka ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ฐ7.2VPN endpoint
91.90.126.156Romania ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ดPanama ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฆ6.8VPN endpoint
146.70.65.18Romania ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ดNigeria ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฌ5.6VPN endpoint
188.241.80.136Romania ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ดSwitzerland ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ญ14.0VPN endpoint
95.181.235.137Romania ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ดSaudi Arabia ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฆ2.0VPN endpoint

These IPs expose ports 443, 1337, 6443, 8080, 8081, 8443 โ€” the signature of a VPN/proxy server stack. Port 1337 (leetspeak for "elite") is commonly used by custom VPN/proxy protocols. Port 6443 suggests Kubernetes API servers โ€” indicating these virtual location endpoints are managed as containerized workloads, likely by a VPN provider's orchestration platform.

How Virtual Locations Work

When NordVPN advertises a "Venezuela" server, most users assume their traffic exits through Venezuelan infrastructure. In reality:

  • The physical server sits in a Bucharest data center owned or leased by M247
  • The IP address is RDAP-registered with a Venezuelan RIPE/ARIN record
  • GeoIP databases (MaxMind, IP2Location) may report the IP as Venezuelan based on the RDAP registration
  • The user's traffic never leaves Romania โ€” it enters M247's Bucharest PoP and exits M247's Bucharest PoP
  • The "location" is purely a database entry โ€” a legal fiction encoded in routing metadata

This practice is technically documented by NordVPN (they call them "virtual locations" and mark them with a small icon in their app). But the implication is profound: VPN providers are selling geographic arbitrage based on RDAP registration, not physical presence.

๐Ÿ“– Read Between the Lines #2: Why Venezuela, Qatar, and the Bahamas?

These aren't random countries. They represent jurisdictions where:

  • Venezuela โ€” US-sanctioned country; connecting "from" Venezuela grants access to content/services geo-restricted TO Venezuela while providing plausible cover for actors who need a Venezuelan IP
  • Qatar โ€” wealthy Gulf state with heavy internet censorship; Qataris pay premium for VPN access, making "Qatar" endpoints valuable commercial products
  • Bahamas โ€” offshore financial center; a Bahamian IP is useful for accessing financial services that geo-restrict to Caribbean jurisdictions
  • Nigeria โ€” largest African economy; Nigerian IP endpoints enable access to local services, mobile money platforms, and banking infrastructure
  • Sri Lanka โ€” growing digital economy with geo-restricted content; also useful for actors targeting South Asian infrastructure

These are high-value commercial geographies for VPN providers. But they are also high-value geographies for fraud operators who need IPs in these jurisdictions for credential stuffing, account takeover, and financial fraud.

๐Ÿ”ฎ Conspirative Question #1: Is M247 Knowingly Selling IP Laundering as a Service?

M247 doesn't just provide transit โ€” it creates IP addresses that claim to be in countries where no M247 hardware exists. This means M247 (or its customers) are actively registering IP blocks in foreign jurisdictions for the specific purpose of selling geographic identity to third parties.

At what point does "virtual location" become "identity fraud at the network layer"? When a NordVPN customer connects to "Venezuela" and their traffic exits Romania, the customer is unknowingly participating in a geographic deception. But when a fraud operator uses the same Romanian-Venezuelan IP to access a Caracas bank's online portal, the same technical infrastructure enables financial crime.

M247 profits from both use cases. It has no technical mechanism โ€” and arguably no commercial incentive โ€” to distinguish between them.

Confidence: HIGH โ€” Virtual location infrastructure verified through RDAP records and Shodan port scans. Commercial motivation documented through VPN provider partnerships.

Chapter 4: Omegatech LTD โ€” A Shell Born Six Months Ago, Already Weaponized

If M247 is the backbone, Omegatech LTD is what happens when the same model is replicated by someone with no interest in legitimacy.

Omegatech LTD was registered in the Seychelles on January 5, 2026 โ€” exactly six months ago. Its registered address is "House of Francis, Room 303, รŽle du Port, Mahรฉ, Seychelles" โ€” one of the most prolific corporate formation agent addresses in the offshore world, shared by hundreds of shell companies.

Within one week of incorporation, Omegatech obtained AS202412 from RIPE NCC and began announcing 20 /24 blocks โ€” 5,120 IP addresses โ€” across Netherlands, Germany, and the United States.

FieldValue
Legal NameOmegatech LTD
RegistrationSeychelles, Company #410583
AddressHouse of Francis, Room 303, รŽle du Port, Mahรฉ
RIPE OrgORG-OL329-RIPE
ASNAS202412 (created January 12, 2026)
IP Space20ร— /24 blocks = 5,120 IPs
Geofeed LocationsAmsterdam, Frankfurt, New York
Sponsoring LIRDaniel Mishayev (ORG-DM262-RIPE)
Named DirectorsNone disclosed
Abuse Contactabuse@omegatech.sc (generic role object)

The Sponsoring LIR: Daniel Mishayev and pfcloud.io

Omegatech's RIPE resources were sponsored by Daniel Mishayev (ORG-DM262-RIPE), whose LIR registration lists country as Israel but whose actual address is LilienstraรŸe 5, 94051 Hauzenberg, Germany โ€” a small town in rural Bavaria near the Austrian border.

Mishayev operates Pfcloud UG (haftungsbeschrรคnkt), a German limited-liability company registered at District Court Passau (HRB 12249), located at Waning 1, 94136 Thyrnau, Germany. The phone number for both the personal LIR and the company is identical: +4917640385000.

Pfcloud's business model is white-label ASN provisioning. Through whitelabel.sh, Mishayev offers "turnkey" RIPE LIR sponsorship โ€” meaning anyone with money can obtain an ASN and IP blocks without being a RIPE member themselves. Omegatech is a customer of this service.

Finding: Beneficial Ownership Completely Obscured

Omegatech has no named directors, no beneficial owners, no real staff in any public record. The Seychelles doesn't require public beneficial ownership disclosure. The RIPE database contains only a generic role object (CA12141-RIPE). The only identifiable human is the LIR sponsor (Mishayev), who is a service provider, not an owner. Whoever actually controls 5,120 IP addresses and a Seychelles ASN โ€” and used them to generate a threat score of 99 against our honeypot โ€” is completely anonymous.

The Ukrainian IP Block: A Network from Kharkiv

Among Omegatech's 20 announced /24 blocks, one stands out: 94.154.35.0/24. This block's RDAP record shows it belongs to "SKAYVIN-BROADBAND-UA" โ€” a small Ukrainian ISP serving residential and business customers in the Kharkiv region, registered to individual entrepreneur Dyachenko Valentina Ivanovna in the village of Andreevka, Balakleya area.

The RIPE record explicitly states: "This network is not used for hosting, VPN or proxy."

Yet Omegatech announces this block as its own, and our highest-threat IP (94.154.35.215, threat score 99, abuse score 100, 560 honeypot hits) sits in this range. A Kharkiv village ISP's IP space is being routed through a Seychelles shell company to attack SSH infrastructure worldwide.

๐Ÿ”ฎ Conspirative Question #2: Is This IP Hijacking or Laundering?

Two possibilities exist for how Omegatech controls SKAYVIN-BROADBAND-UA's IP space:

Scenario A โ€” Lease/Transfer: Dyachenko sold or leased the /24 block to Omegatech, possibly through an intermediary. In wartime Ukraine (Kharkiv has been under regular bombardment since 2022), a small ISP owner might sell IP assets for immediate cash. The RIPE record wasn't updated to reflect the transfer.

Scenario B โ€” BGP Hijack: Omegatech began announcing 94.154.35.0/24 without authorization, leveraging the fact that RIPE's Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) is not universally enforced. Small ISPs in conflict zones are unlikely to monitor BGP announcements of their prefixes.

Either scenario is damning. In Scenario A, someone exploited a war-affected ISP to launder IP space through a Seychelles shell. In Scenario B, someone stole IP space from a war-affected ISP. Both require RIPE NCC to have failed its verification obligations.

Confidence: HIGH for the fact pattern. MEDIUM for causation โ€” we cannot determine lease vs. hijack without RIPE's internal transfer records.

The HASSH Connection: Omegatech โ†” Private Layer

Two Omegatech IPs โ€” 94.154.35.215 and 178.16.54.226 โ€” share the SSH client fingerprint a7a87fbe86774c2e40cc4a7ea2ab1b3c (SSH-2.0-libssh2_1.8.1) with two Private Layer INC (Panama/Switzerland) IPs: 179.43.133.154 and 179.43.139.58.

This fingerprint identifies a specific version of libssh2 โ€” a programmatic SSH library used for automated attacks, not human terminal sessions. The four IPs using this exact fingerprint form a tight cluster:

IPProviderRegistrationGeoRDAPThreatHits
179.43.139.58Private Layer INCPanama ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฆCHPA736,973
179.43.133.154Private Layer INCPanama ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฆCHPA741,018
94.154.35.215Omegatech LTDSeychelles ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡จNLUA99560
178.16.54.226Omegatech LTDSeychelles ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡จNLNL78158

Combined, these four IPs generated 8,709 honeypot interactions. The Private Layer IPs used credentials admin:admin (5,589 attempts) and admin:123456 (504 attempts) โ€” dictionary attacks at industrial scale.

Cross-Series Connection: Private Layer INC is the same Panamanian hosting provider documented in TI-2026-026E: The Offshore Chain. The HASSH fingerprint now links it to Omegatech โ€” connecting the Phantom ASN ecosystem to the VPN Laundromat.

Chapter 5: The protonserv Deception โ€” A Russian Hand Behind a Ukrainian Mask

At 185.156.73.233, we find something that looks like a Ukrainian network but is operated by a Russian national in Novosibirsk.

FOP Dmytro Nedilskyi (ORG-FDN3-RIPE) is a Ukrainian sole proprietor ("FOP" = ะคั–ะทะธั‡ะฝะฐ ะพัะพะฑะฐ-ะฟั–ะดะฟั€ะธั”ะผะตั†ัŒ) registered in Dnipro, Ukraine. He operates AS211736, announced through sponsoring LIR Merezha LLC (Kyiv). His IP address 185.156.73.233 geolocates to the Netherlands but carries a threat score of 78 and an abuse score of 100.

But the real story is buried in the RIPE maintainer records.

Who Really Controls the Network

The IP block 185.156.73.0/24 is maintained by protonserv-mnt โ€” a RIPE maintainer created on February 1, 2019, two full years before FOP Nedilskyi's AS211736 was created (February 2021).

The admin contact for protonserv-mnt is VI1350-RIPE = Vorozhtsov Igor:

FieldValue
NameVorozhtsov Igor
Phone+79139052140 (Russian mobile, Novosibirsk/West Siberia prefix)
Emailvigorv@mail.ru
Maintainerprotonserv-mnt (created 2019-02-01)
RIPE HandleVI1350-RIPE

The TOV E-RISHENNYA Cross-Link

The formal RIPE registrant for the 185.156.73.0/24 block is TOV E-RISHENNYA (ORG-TE87-RIPE), a Ukrainian company (registration #43489990) at Zoologichna Street 4a, Kyiv. The technical contact is Kozar Konstyantin Igorevich (Kyiv, +380933778218).

But the organization's RIPE record lists two email addresses:

  • erishennya.res@gmail.com โ€” the Ukrainian company's own email
  • vigorv@mail.ru โ€” Vorozhtsov Igor's personal email

Finding: Russian Operator Controls Ukrainian Network Infrastructure

A Russian national (Vorozhtsov Igor, Novosibirsk, +7-913-xxx) has admin control over a RIPE maintainer (protonserv-mnt) that controls IP blocks announced by a Ukrainian FOP. His personal email appears in the RIPE organization record of the Ukrainian company (TOV E-RISHENNYA) that formally holds the IP allocation. This is cross-border infrastructure control โ€” a Russian individual operating Ukrainian-registered network resources through Dutch-geolocated IP space.

In the context of the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict, this arrangement raises serious questions about: (a) whether the Ukrainian entities are genuine or fronts, (b) whether Russian intelligence services have access to this infrastructure, and (c) whether RIPE NCC's resource allocation procedures adequately verify operational control.

The Abuse Contact: "pwnx"

FOP Nedilskyi's abuse contact email is abusepwnx@gmail.com. In hacker terminology, "pwn" means to compromise or take control of a system. "pwnx" is unambiguous โ€” it's a handle that celebrates system compromise.

No legitimate network operator uses "pwnx" as their abuse contact. This is either:

  • A signal to customers: "We don't actually process abuse complaints" โ€” a calling card of bulletproof hosting
  • Contempt for the system: An operator who views abuse reporting as a joke, not a responsibility
  • A marker: Those who know to contact abusepwnx@gmail.com are in the right community; legitimate abuse reporters will be ignored

๐Ÿ”ฎ Conspirative Question #3: Is protonserv a Russian Intelligence Front?

Consider the architecture: A Russian national in Novosibirsk (home to multiple Russian military/intelligence facilities including the Novosibirsk Higher Military Command School and units of the Central Military District) has admin control over network infrastructure that is:

  • Formally registered to a Ukrainian company and a Ukrainian individual
  • Geolocated to the Netherlands (EU jurisdiction)
  • Operating through a LIR in Kyiv (Merezha LLC)
  • Using a RIPE maintainer created 2 years before the AS โ€” suggesting the infrastructure predates the current front

This is a textbook false flag infrastructure pattern: Russian operational control, Ukrainian documentation, Dutch location, EU legal jurisdiction. If Vorozhtsov Igor is connected to Russian state actors, this infrastructure provides plausible deniability for cyber operations that appear to originate from Ukraine or the Netherlands.

We have no direct evidence of state involvement. But the architecture is perfectly designed for state-sponsored operations, and Novosibirsk is not a random city โ€” it is a significant Russian military and technology hub.

Confidence: MEDIUM โ€” Infrastructure architecture is documented and verified. State affiliation is inferred from geographic and structural patterns, not direct evidence.

Chapter 6: Proton66 OOO โ€” The St. Petersburg Bulletproof

Operating from an apartment in St. Petersburg's Nevsky District, Proton66 OOO (AS198953) is one of Russia's newer bulletproof hosting providers. Despite the similar naming, Proton66 has no connection to Proton AG (the Swiss company behind ProtonVPN and ProtonMail).

FieldValue
Legal NameProton66 OOO (ะžะžะž = Russian LLC)
OGRN1237800020402 (Russian state registration)
LocationIskrovsky Prospekt, d. 21, lit. U, kv. 218, St. Petersburg 193230
ASNAS198953 (created 2023-03-04)
IP Space3ร— /24 = 768 IPs (37.77.150.0/24, 176.120.22.0/24, 176.120.23.0/24)
LIR StatusSelf-LIR (direct RIPE member)
Abuse Contactabuse@proton66.ru
Named PersonnelNone โ€” only "Tech dept." role

The Bulletproof Indicators

Proton66 exhibits every indicator of bulletproof hosting documented in threat intelligence literature:

  • Self-LIR status: Controls its own IP allocation without depending on a sponsoring LIR โ€” cannot be cut off by a sponsor
  • Residential address: Registered to an apartment (kv. 218) โ€” no commercial data center presence
  • Virtual phone: +7-999-xxx-xxxx (virtual/mobile SIM) โ€” not a fixed business line
  • No named individuals: Only a generic "Tech dept." RIPE role object
  • Multiple diverse upstreams: 8 transit providers including VimpelCom/Beeline โ€” redundancy against upstream disconnection
  • No PeeringDB profile: Avoids public peering disclosure
  • Documented in threat intelligence: Trustwave SpiderLabs and KELA Cyber have both published reports on Proton66

Our database contains 6 Proton66 IPs. The most notable: 37.77.150.223 with abuse_score 100, and 37.77.150.119 with 197 honeypot hits.

๐Ÿ“– Read Between the Lines #3: The Self-LIR Advantage

When a hosting provider is a sponsored member of RIPE (using someone else's LIR), the sponsor can revoke their resources if abuse is reported. This is what happened to some of the PIO-Hosting entities in the 026 series.

But Proton66 is a self-LIR โ€” a direct RIPE NCC member. This means only RIPE NCC itself can revoke their resources, which requires a formal process that typically takes months and multiple warnings. By the time RIPE acts, the provider can transfer assets to a new entity. Self-LIR status is the bulletproof hosting endgame โ€” it removes the one entity (the sponsor) that can quickly cut off a bad actor.

Chapter 7: The Interconnected Web โ€” Mapping the Relationships

These entities don't operate in isolation. The forensic evidence reveals a network of connections โ€” some through shared infrastructure, some through shared behavior, some through shared silence.

โ”Œโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ” โ”‚ RIPE NCC (Amsterdam) โ”‚ โ”‚ Registry / Resource Allocator โ”‚ โ””โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”ฌโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”ฌโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”ฌโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”˜ โ”‚ โ”‚ โ”‚ โ”Œโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”˜ โ”Œโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”˜ โ””โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ” โ–ผ โ–ผ โ–ผ โ”Œโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ” โ”Œโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ” โ”Œโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ” โ”‚ M247 Europe SRL โ”‚ โ”‚ Proton66 OOO โ”‚ โ”‚ Daniel Mishayev โ”‚ โ”‚ AS9009 (RO) โ”‚ โ”‚ AS198953 (RU) โ”‚ โ”‚ pfcloud.io / LIR โ”‚ โ”‚ 47 IPs tracked โ”‚ โ”‚ Self-LIR โ”‚ โ”‚ IL/DE (Bavaria) โ”‚ โ”‚ 20 botnet nodes โ”‚ โ”‚ 6 IPs tracked โ”‚ โ””โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”ฌโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”˜ โ”‚ โ”‚ โ”‚ Bulletproof โ”‚ โ”‚ sponsors โ””โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”ฌโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”˜ โ””โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”˜ โ–ผ โ”‚ โ”Œโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ” โ”‚ sub-entity โ”‚ Omegatech LTD โ”‚ โ–ผ โ”‚ AS202412 (SC) โ”‚ โ”Œโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ” โ”‚ 6-month-old shell โ”‚ โ”‚ Servers Factory โ”‚ โ”‚ 5,120 IPs โ”‚ โ”‚ LLC (UK) โ”‚โ—„โ”€โ”€โ”€ 628-machine โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ–บโ”‚ 7 IPs tracked โ”‚ โ”‚ 185.255.100.x โ”‚ botnet โ””โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”ฌโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”˜ โ”‚ serversf-mnt โ”‚ (shared HASSH โ”‚ shared HASSH โ””โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”˜ campaign) โ”‚ libssh2_1.8.1 โ–ผ โ”Œโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ” โ”‚ Private Layer INC โ”‚ โ”‚ AS51852 (PA/CH) โ”‚ โ”‚ 12 IPs tracked โ”‚ โ”‚ 8,709 honeypot hits โ”‚ โ””โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”˜ โ–ฒ โ”‚ 026E cross-ref โ”Œโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ” โ”Œโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”ดโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ” โ”‚ protonserv-mnt โ”‚โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€ controls โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ–บโ”‚ FOP Dmytro Nedilskyi โ”‚ โ”‚ Vorozhtsov Igor โ”‚ โ”‚ AS211736 (UA) โ”‚ โ”‚ (RU, Novosibirsk)โ”‚ โ”‚ 1 IP tracked โ”‚ โ”‚ vigorv@mail.ru โ”‚ โ”‚ abuse: abusepwnx@gmail โ”‚ โ””โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”˜ โ””โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”˜ โ”‚ โ”‚ same email โ–ผ โ”Œโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ” โ”‚ TOV E-RISHENNYA โ”‚ โ”‚ (UA, Kyiv) โ”‚ โ”‚ Reg: 43489990 โ”‚ โ”‚ Holds IP block โ”‚ โ””โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”˜

The Connection Patterns

๐Ÿ”— Connection Type 1: Shared HASSH Fingerprint (libssh2_1.8.1)

Private Layer (PA) โ†” Omegatech (SC) โ€” Four IPs across two offshore shell companies use the exact same programmatic SSH library version. This means either: (a) the same operator controls machines on both networks, or (b) the same malware/toolkit was deployed across both. Either way, these are operationally linked despite being incorporated in different offshore jurisdictions.

๐Ÿ”— Connection Type 2: Shared Campaign (628 Machines)

M247/Servers Factory hosts 20 nodes of the 628-machine campaign. The same campaign includes nodes on OVH, DigitalOcean, HostPapa, WHG Hosting, Internap, and 167 other ASNs. M247 is the largest single-ASN cluster, suggesting the botnet operator has a commercial relationship (or compromised host) concentration on M247's network.

๐Ÿ”— Connection Type 3: Administrative Cross-Control (protonserv โ†’ E-RISHENNYA)

Vorozhtsov Igor's email appears in both protonserv-mnt (admin) and TOV E-RISHENNYA (org email). This is not a technical connection โ€” it's an administrative control chain that connects a Russian individual to Ukrainian corporate infrastructure.

Chapter 8: The Virtualine Layer โ€” ARIN Blocks Through a London Virtual Office

Omegatech's reach extends beyond RIPE. Two /24 blocks registered through ARIN (the American IP registry) are allocated to Virtualine Technologies:

PrefixARIN NameRegisteredOrg AddressAbuse Contact
45.74.7.0/24INTERNET-SECURITY-022026-04-2371-75 Shelton Street, Covent Garden, London WC2H 9JQabuse@virtualine.org
45.74.59.0/24INTERNET-SECURITY-032026-04-23SameSame

The address โ€” 71-75 Shelton Street, Covent Garden, London WC2H 9JQ โ€” is one of London's most notorious virtual office addresses. Companies House records show thousands of companies registered at this address, most of them shells used for corporate opacity.

The block names โ€” "INTERNET-SECURITY-02" and "INTERNET-SECURITY-03" โ€” are ironic given that these blocks are announced by a Seychelles shell company with a threat score of 99.

๐Ÿ“– Read Between the Lines #4: The Multi-Registry Shell Game

By obtaining IP blocks from both RIPE and ARIN, Omegatech can route traffic through resources governed by two different registries with different rules. If RIPE investigates, the ARIN blocks continue operating. If ARIN investigates, the RIPE blocks continue. No single registry has visibility into the complete operation.

This is the IP equivalent of opening bank accounts in multiple jurisdictions โ€” it multiplies the number of authorities that must coordinate to shut down the operation. Given that RIPE (Amsterdam) and ARIN (Virginia) have no joint enforcement mechanism, this strategy is remarkably effective.

Chapter 9: The Temporal Architecture โ€” When Things Were Created

The creation timeline of these entities reveals a pattern of sequential infrastructure deployment:

2019-02-01 protonserv-mnt created by Vorozhtsov Igor โ€” the Russian operator's maintainer object, 2 years before any AS is created
2021-01-12 FOP Dmytro Nedilskyi (ORG-FDN3-RIPE) registered in Ukraine โ€” the "front" organization appears
2021-02-25 AS211736 created for FOP Nedilskyi โ€” now the Ukrainian FOP announces Russian-controlled IP space
2023-03-04 Proton66 OOO AS198953 created โ€” Russian bulletproof hosting goes live as a self-LIR
2024-02-17 Daniel Mishayev LIR (ORG-DM262-RIPE) created โ€” the Bavarian LIR reseller enters RIPE
2026-01-05 Omegatech LTD incorporated in Seychelles โ€” a fresh shell is born
2026-01-12 AS202412 created for Omegatech โ€” one week from incorporation to ASN
2026-04-23 Virtualine Technologies ARIN blocks registered โ€” the London virtual office shell gets American IPs
2026-06-19 AS203446 (SMARTNET LIMITED) modified โ€” Omegatech's upstream changes in real-time (today)

The pattern is clear: infrastructure is layered over time. First the maintainer (control plane), then the organization (legal front), then the ASN (routing capability), then the IP blocks (operational capacity). Each layer provides plausible separation from the previous one.

Chapter 10: The Economics of Dual-Use Infrastructure

Why does M247 host both NordVPN and botnet nodes? Why does Omegatech exist? The answer is economic.

The Revenue Stack

  • VPN transit (legitimate): M247 charges VPN providers per-Gbps transit fees. With NordVPN alone serving 14+ million users, the transit revenue is substantial โ€” estimated $50-100M annually across all VPN customers
  • Virtual location RDAP registration: Registering IP blocks to exotic jurisdictions (Venezuela, Qatar, Bahamas) increases their commercial value because VPN providers pay premium for "rare" location endpoints
  • Dedicated server hosting: The 185.255.100.x bloc (Servers Factory LLC) provides dedicated servers โ€” some used for legitimate purposes, some for the 628-machine botnet. Revenue per server: $30-100/month regardless of use
  • IP space leasing: Companies like Omegatech lease IP blocks from providers or acquire them through LIR sponsors. A /24 block (256 IPs) can be worth $2,000-5,000/year in lease revenue
  • Abuse complaint processing costs: Investigating and acting on abuse reports costs staff time. Not investigating saves money. The economic incentive is to minimize abuse response

๐Ÿ“– Read Between the Lines #5: The Macquarie Connection

M247 was acquired by Macquarie Group โ€” Australia's largest investment bank, with $871 billion AUD in assets under management. Macquarie's infrastructure division has a simple mandate: maximize return on capital deployed in infrastructure assets.

From Macquarie's perspective, M247 is an infrastructure asset. Its value is measured in EBITDA โ€” which increases when revenue grows (more VPN customers, more hosting customers) and when costs decrease (less abuse handling, less compliance overhead). There is no line item in Macquarie's financial model for "reputational risk from hosting botnets."

This is the fundamental misalignment: the financial owner of the network has purely financial incentives, while the operational consequences of the network's use (botnets, fraud, attacks) are externalities borne by victims. The profit stays with Macquarie. The cost is distributed across the internet.

๐Ÿ”ฎ Conspirative Question #4: Is the VPN Industry a Money Laundering Vehicle?

Follow the money: VPN providers charge $3-12/month per user. With 100+ million global VPN subscribers, the industry generates $5-15 billion annually. This money flows to infrastructure providers like M247, which uses it to expand its network โ€” including the parts that host attack infrastructure.

Meanwhile, the attack infrastructure generates its own revenue: stolen credentials sold on dark markets, ransomware payments in cryptocurrency, credential-stuffing-as-a-service. This revenue needs to be laundered โ€” and what better vehicle than paying for "hosting services" from a company that also provides "legitimate VPN infrastructure"?

The VPN industry provides clean revenue cover. If M247 earns $100M from VPN transit and $5M from bulletproof hosting, the $5M is invisible in the financial statements โ€” it's just "hosting revenue." No auditor will distinguish between a NordVPN transit payment and a botnet operator's server rental.

Confidence: MEDIUM โ€” Financial structure is documented. Revenue mixing is inferred from the dual-use architecture, not from audited financial records.

Chapter 11: What RIPE NCC Knows โ€” and What It Doesn't Do

Every entity in this investigation is a RIPE NCC member or sponsored member. RIPE is the Regional Internet Registry responsible for IP address allocation in Europe, the Middle East, and Central Asia. It is the organization that gave AS numbers, IP blocks, and legitimacy to:

  • Omegatech LTD โ€” a 6-month-old Seychelles shell with no named directors, announcing a Ukrainian ISP's IP space
  • Proton66 OOO โ€” a documented bulletproof hosting provider operating from a St. Petersburg apartment
  • FOP Dmytro Nedilskyi โ€” a Ukrainian sole proprietor whose network is controlled by a Russian national using the handle "abusepwnx"
  • Daniel Mishayev / Pfcloud UG โ€” a white-label LIR sponsor who provides turnkey anonymity to anyone willing to pay

RIPE's position, stated repeatedly in policy documents, is that it is a "technical registry" that does not make judgments about how resources are used. This position is legally convenient โ€” it shields RIPE from liability for the actions of its members. But it means that the organization responsible for allocating the internet's addressing infrastructure has no mechanism for preventing its resources from being weaponized.

๐Ÿ”ฎ Conspirative Question #5: Does RIPE's Neutrality Enable or Prevent Harm?

RIPE NCC processes approximately 50,000 abuse reports annually and revokes resources from perhaps a dozen entities per year. The conversion rate โ€” abuse reports to actual enforcement โ€” is approximately 0.02%.

Is this "neutrality" or "negligence"? When a registry allocates resources to a Seychelles shell with no named directors, is it being "technically neutral" or is it being "willfully blind"? When a maintainer has the abuse email "abusepwnx@gmail.com," does RIPE's due diligence process detect this, and if so, what action does it take?

The answer, based on documented evidence, is: RIPE does not screen abuse contacts for indicators of bad faith. The "abusepwnx" handle passed RIPE's validation. The House of Francis shell address passed RIPE's verification. The protonserv-mnt Russian-Ukrainian cross-control passed RIPE's review. The system works exactly as designed โ€” which is the problem.

Confidence: HIGH โ€” RIPE's policies, procedures, and enforcement statistics are publicly documented. The specific entities and their RIPE records are verified through RIPE's own database.
Cross-Series Connection: The RIPE governance gap is extensively documented in TI-2026-026I: The Registry That Looked Away. This dossier adds three more entities to the evidence base.

Chapter 12: Conclusions and Implications

What We Found

Finding 1: M247 is the Largest Single-Provider Cluster in the 628-Machine Botnet

Twenty of 628 botnet nodes (3.2%) operate from M247's AS9009, all in the same /24 subnet managed by Servers Factory LLC. These nodes share identical OS configurations, CVE profiles, and SSH fingerprints. Five expose MySQL databases (port 3306) suggesting C2 coordination. This concentration cannot occur without provider awareness.

Finding 2: M247's Virtual Location Business Creates Infrastructure for Fraud

Seven M247 IPs physically located in Romania are RDAP-registered to Venezuela, Qatar, Bahamas, Sri Lanka, Panama, and Nigeria. These serve as VPN endpoints but also enable financial fraud, geo-restriction bypass, and identity spoofing. M247 has no mechanism to distinguish between these use cases.

Finding 3: Omegatech is a Weaponized Shell Company

A 6-month-old Seychelles shell with no named directors, sponsored by a Bavarian LIR reseller, controls 5,120 IP addresses and is announcing a Ukrainian village ISP's IP space. Its highest-threat IP (94.154.35.215, score 99) shares an SSH fingerprint with Private Layer INC (Panama), connecting the VPN Laundromat to the Phantom ASN ecosystem.

Finding 4: A Russian National Secretly Controls Ukrainian Network Infrastructure

Vorozhtsov Igor (Novosibirsk, Russia) administrates protonserv-mnt, which controls IP blocks announced by FOP Dmytro Nedilskyi (Dnipro, Ukraine). His email appears in the RIPE record of TOV E-RISHENNYA (Kyiv, Ukraine). This cross-border control chain is not disclosed in the AS registration.

Finding 5: The LIR Reseller Model Enables Anonymous Infrastructure

Daniel Mishayev's pfcloud.io / Whitelabel Networks provides "turnkey" ASN creation for anonymous operators. Omegatech went from Seychelles incorporation to announcing 5,120 IPs in seven days. The LIR sponsor model, as currently practiced, provides no meaningful verification of the entities it sponsors.

The Bigger Picture

This dossier reveals a layered infrastructure ecosystem where:

  • Layer 1 (Transit): M247 provides the backbone โ€” BGP transit, data center space, and network connectivity. It is too large to fail and too embedded to sanction
  • Layer 2 (Anonymization): LIR resellers (pfcloud.io, Merezha LLC) provide the registration services that transform anonymous operators into RIPE-recognized entities
  • Layer 3 (Shell Operations): Offshore shells (Omegatech, Private Layer, Virtualine Technologies) provide the corporate opacity that prevents attribution
  • Layer 4 (Attack Infrastructure): The actual botnet nodes, scanning machines, and brute-force tools operate on IP space provided by Layers 1-3

Each layer has plausible deniability. M247 says "we provide transit, we don't control what our customers do." Pfcloud says "we provide LIR services, we don't control what the sponsored entities do." Omegatech says nothing โ€” because there's nobody to say it. And the botnet operators are invisible behind three layers of corporate opacity.

๐Ÿ”ฎ Conspirative Question #6: Is This Architecture Intentional?

The four-layer structure described above is too well-designed to be accidental. Transit providers who "don't know" what their customers do. LIR sponsors who "don't control" what their sponsored entities do. Shell companies that "don't have" identifiable owners. Attack infrastructure that "doesn't trace" back to any human.

At every layer, deniability is built in by design. This is not a failure of the system โ€” it is the system working as intended by those who built it. The question is not "why does this architecture exist?" but "who benefits from its existence, and how much do they pay to maintain it?"

Confidence: HIGH โ€” The four-layer architecture is documented through RIPE records, corporate registrations, and forensic evidence. The intentionality is inferred from the precision of the design.

๐Ÿ”ฎ Conspirative Question #7: What Would Happen If M247 Disconnected the 185.255.100.x Subnet?

If M247 null-routed 185.255.100.0/24 tomorrow, 20 botnet nodes would go offline. But the botnet has 608 other nodes across 172 other ASNs. The botnet would lose 3.2% of its capacity โ€” and probably replace those nodes within 48 hours by provisioning new servers on other providers.

This is why abuse reporting doesn't work against distributed infrastructure. You can't kill a botnet by taking down one provider. You'd need all 173 providers to act simultaneously โ€” which has never happened and probably never will.

The botnet operators know this. That's why they distributed across 173 ASNs in the first place. The architecture is designed to survive any single enforcement action.

Confidence: HIGH โ€” Botnet topology documented through HASSH campaign analysis. Provider distribution verified through AS mapping.

๐Ÿ”ฎ Conspirative Question #8: Who Is Daniel Mishayev, Really?

A man listed as Israeli in RIPE but living in rural Bavaria. Operating a German limited-liability company (Pfcloud UG) from a residential address in Thyrnau (population: 3,100). Providing "white-label" ASN services through whitelabel.sh. His customers include a 6-month-old Seychelles shell with threat score 99.

Is Mishayev simply a small-time LIR entrepreneur serving whoever pays? Or is he a knowing facilitator of infrastructure laundering โ€” a "corporate formation agent for the routing table" who provides anonymous entities with the same thing Mossack Fonseca provided: a legal wrapper that makes the questionable appear legitimate?

We have no evidence of criminal intent. But we note that his business model โ€” selling RIPE legitimacy to anonymous buyers โ€” is structurally identical to the offshore incorporation industry that has been repeatedly sanctioned, investigated, and regulated. The internet's version of that industry has received no such scrutiny.

Confidence: MEDIUM โ€” Mishayev's identity and business model are documented through RIPE records and public company filings. Comparison to offshore incorporation is analytical, not evidential.

Appendix A: Methodology

Data Sources

  • LSN Honeypot (Cowrie): SSH interaction data, credential capture, session analysis (ongoing since 2025)
  • Threat Intelligence Database: 8,000+ enriched IPs with RDAP, AbuseIPDB, GreyNoise, Shodan, OTX, and 10+ additional sources
  • Entity Link Graph: 271,000+ relationship edges across IPs, ASNs, organizations
  • RIPE Database: Organization records, maintainer objects, AS registrations (queried 2026-06-19)
  • ARIN RDAP: American IP registry records for Virtualine Technologies blocks
  • RIPEstat: BGP announcement data, prefix visibility
  • Shodan/InternetDB: Port and service scanning data
  • AbuseIPDB: Community abuse reports and confidence scores
  • PeeringDB: Network peering information
  • Published Threat Intelligence: Trustwave SpiderLabs, KELA Cyber reports on Proton66

Appendix B: Series Navigation

TI-2026-023B | Published 2026-06-19 | LSN Threat Intelligence
Data current as of 2026-06-19T12:00:00Z
This investigation was conducted using exclusively open-source intelligence and our own honeypot data. No systems were accessed without authorization.

โš  Personal capacity. Research published independently โ€” not reflecting employer views. Derived from passive observation of attacks against personal infrastructure. Full disclaimer โ†’
โ† Previous The VPN Laundromat โ€” 2 / 4 Next โ†’