165 CloudFlare Nodes in 85 of totally 130 Countries
Visit this page regularly as it is updated daily. Last data update: 15-06-2026 07:46:24 UTC
Africa
Algeria (1|4)
Ethiopia (1|5)
Ivory Coast (1|5)
Kenya (2|7)
Mauritius (1|5)
Mozambique (1|2)
Reunion (1|3)
Rwanda (1|1)
South Africa (2|42)
Tanzania (1|6)
Zimbabwe (1|1)Asia
Armenia (1|5)
Azerbaijan (2|5)
Bahrain (1|1)
Bangladesh (1|33)
China (1|470)
Georgia (1|9)
India (4|111)
Indonesia (3|9)
Israel (2|19)
Japan (3|99)
Jordan (1|4)
Kuwait (1|3)
Laos (1|2)
Malaysia (1|35)
Mongolia (1|1)
Nepal (1|15)
Oman (1|9)
Pakistan (2|16)
Philippines (1|5)
Singapore (1|567)
South Korea (1|10)
Sri Lanka (1|1)
Taiwan (2|23)
Thailand (1|21)
Turkey (1|84)
United Arab Emirates (1|4)
Vietnam (2|4)Europe
Albania (1|1)
Austria (1|145)
Belgium (1|27)
Bulgaria (1|75)
Croatia (1|2)
Cyprus (1|9)
Czech Republic (1|45)
Denmark (1|74)
Estonia (1|18)
Finland (1|22)
France (3|550)
Germany (6|623)
Greece (1|38)
Hungary (1|9)
Iceland (1|2)
Ireland (1|18)
Italy (2|167)
Latvia (1|27)
Lithuania (1|7)
Luxembourg (1|2)
Moldova (1|1)
Netherlands (1|528)
Norway (1|29)
Poland (1|184)
Portugal (1|36)
Romania (1|80)
Russia (1|12)
Serbia (1|14)
Slovakia (1|12)
Spain (2|150)
Sweden (1|78)
Switzerland (2|49)
Ukraine (1|10)
United Kingdom (3|535)
Canada (4|115)
Costa Rica (1|3)
Guatemala (1|4)
Mexico (1|1)
United States (29|1741)
Australia (5|157)
French Polynesia (1|1)
New Caledonia (1|3)
New Zealand (1|10)
Argentina (1|24)
Brazil (5|273)
Chile (1|15)
Ecuador (2|9)United States: 29 Nodes with 1741 IP Addresses
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | Mexico (MX) | 172.69.64.132 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | Mexico (MX) | 172.69.64.194 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | United States (US) | 172.69.64.212 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | United States (US) | 172.69.64.241 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | United States (US) | 172.69.64.243 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | United States (US) | 172.69.65.177 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | United States (US) | 172.69.65.19 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | Brazil (BR) | 172.69.65.192 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | United States (US) | 172.69.65.221 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | United States (US) | 172.69.65.50 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | United States (US) | 172.69.65.51 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | United States (US) | 172.69.65.58 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | Mexico (MX) | 172.69.65.62 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | United States (US) | 172.69.65.81 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | United States (US) | 172.69.65.82 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | United States (US) | 172.69.67.114 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | United States (US) | 172.69.67.128 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | United States (US) | 172.69.67.130 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | Mexico (MX) | 172.69.67.145 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | United States (US) | 172.69.67.156 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | United States (US) | 172.69.67.157 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | United States (US) | 172.69.67.158 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | United States (US) | 172.69.67.210 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | Mexico (MX) | 172.69.67.214 |
| DFW | Dallas, TX | United States (US) | United States (US) | 172.69.67.244 |
Parse Time: 101.805 ms
Do Security Plugins Quietly Affect Runtime Cost?
This article explores whether security layers introduce measurable runtime overhead and how that cost should be evaluated without undermining their importance.
The Role of Security Plugins
Security plugins protect against brute force attacks, file tampering, and suspicious requests.They often hook into early execution stages.
That early placement gives them visibility—but also makes their cost global.
Initialization Footprint
Many security tools perform filesystem checks, integrity scans, or rule evaluations during bootstrap.Even lightweight operations accumulate across every request.
On low traffic sites this may be negligible.
Under sustained load, cumulative overhead becomes measurable.
Balancing Risk and Cost
Removing protection to gain milliseconds is rarely justified.The meaningful question is whether checks are executed more often than necessary.
For example, heavy scanning logic need not execute during simple read-only page views.
Request Classification
Distinguishing between anonymous GET requests and administrative POST actions enables smarter enforcement models.Security intensity does not need to be uniform across all routes.
Observability Matters
Few site owners measure the runtime impact of security logic directly.Profiling with and without specific modules enabled reveals actual cost rather than assumed cost.
Neutral Framing
Security and performance are not opposites.The goal is minimizing unnecessary execution while preserving safety.
Selective enforcement can achieve both when implemented carefully.
Key Takeaways
- Security overhead is context-dependent.
- Measure actual runtime impact before forming conclusions.
- Consider route-based enforcement where feasible.
- Balance protection against systemic execution cost.