Is abjav.com safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
43/100

context safety score

A score of 43/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
100
behavior
100
content
0
graph
30

12 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

high

cloaking

Page conditionally redirects based on referrer or user-agent

high

cloaking

Page loads content in transparent or zero-size iframe overlay

high

js obfuscation

JavaScript uses Function constructor for runtime code generation

high

malicious redirect

Popunder/tabunder ad network configured via boannre.com and takedmca.com with 'neverblock' force:true setting, meaning popunders cannot be blocked. The 'neverblock' loaderUrl points to //boannre.com/saber/upornia/confusion/ and an iframe fallback at https://boannre.com/saber/ball/nomad/. These are third-party ad redirect domains that open unsolicited tabs/windows on user interaction with nearly any page element. (location: page.html:69, OnPVFhVe config block)

high

malicious redirect

Popunder SSP URL https://enrtx.com/get/ and https://takedmca.com/get are used as programmatic redirect endpoints. When 'isDonny' campaign IDs are detected, force_url is set to http://nexttads.com/get/?spot_id=526192 — an HTTP (non-TLS) redirect endpoint, bypassing secure transport. These redirect users to unknown destinations determined at runtime by external ad servers. (location: page.html:116, 399)

medium

malicious redirect

Multiple dynamically injected third-party scripts loaded based on geo/campaign conditions: sncec.ajscdn.com/ipp.js, sncec.inppcdn.com/ipp.js, cdn.tapioni.com/vast-im.js, cdn.tapioni.com/ip-push.js. These are inpage push notification and ad-injection scripts from domains with no established reputation, capable of redirecting users or injecting further payloads. (location: page.html:552-601)

medium

hidden content

The main app mount point is <div id='app'><i style='font-size:0.1px'>...</i></div> — an <i> element with font-size set to 0.1px renders text invisible to users but potentially visible to crawlers or AI agents. The ellipsis '...' content is effectively hidden from normal view. (location: page.html:622)

low

hidden content

Yandex Metrika noscript pixel image is positioned at left:-9999px (off-screen), used for covert tracking of users with JavaScript disabled. While common for analytics, it functions as a hidden beacon that transmits visit data without user awareness. (location: page.html:640)

medium

obfuscated code

The script loaded from /ticker/duayn7.10.15.b7386ff4f7ef6648aa9a1afe02e4e162.js has an obfuscated filename incorporating a hash, making it difficult to audit. The OnPVFhVe and xcsVyonA variable names are randomly-generated obfuscated identifiers. The adver library loaded via /assets/previewlib.20210114.decoded.js (mobile) vs /assets/previewl1b.20210114.1.js (desktop) uses visually similar filenames (lib vs l1b — lowercase L replaced with numeral 1) to obscure the distinction between builds. (location: page.html:68-71, 56-62)

medium

obfuscated code

The variable EoCR4 maps CDN video server paths using backslash-escaped forward slashes in a JSON blob embedded in a script tag, obscuring the actual CDN infrastructure (vv.abjav.com, vv2.abjav.com, vv3.abjav.com, vv4.abjav.com). The VAST endpoint https://vstvstsa.com uses a visually confusing repeated-syllable domain designed to appear like a legitimate video ad server. (location: page.html:49)

medium

social engineering

The site implements aggressive interstitial and preplay ad injection targeting mobile iOS users specifically (shouldStartInterstitial condition). On mobile, every element including the play button, video wrapper, header, logo, and footer triggers popunder ads. This dark pattern manipulates users into triggering ad redirects through normal navigation actions, creating a coercive ad experience that may lead to unwanted installs or scam landing pages. (location: page.html:100, 170-172)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/abjav.com

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

Common questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.

Is abjav.com safe for AI agents to use?

abjav.com currently scores 43/100 with a suspicious verdict and low confidence. The goal is to protect agents from high-risk context before they act on it. Treat this as a decision signal: higher scores suggest lower observed risk, while lower scores mean you should add review or block this domain.

How should I interpret the score and verdict?

Use the score as a policy threshold: 80–100 is safe, 50–79 is caution, 20–49 is suspicious, and 0–19 is dangerous. Teams often auto-allow safe, require human review for caution/suspicious, and block dangerous.

How does brin compute this domain score?

brin evaluates four dimensions: identity (source trust), behavior (runtime patterns), content (malicious instructions), and graph (relationship risk). Analysis runs in tiers: static signals, deterministic pattern checks, then AI semantic analysis when needed.

What do identity, behavior, content, and graph mean for this domain?

Identity checks source trust, behavior checks unusual runtime patterns, content checks for malicious instructions, and graph checks risky relationships to other entities. Looking at sub-scores helps you understand why an entity passed or failed.

Why does brin scan packages, repos, skills, MCP servers, pages, and commits?

brin performs risk assessments on external context before it reaches an AI agent. It scores that context for threats like prompt injection, hijacking, credential harvesting, and supply chain attacks, so teams can decide whether to block, review, or proceed safely.

Can I rely on a safe verdict as a full security guarantee?

No. A safe verdict means no significant risk signals were detected in this scan. It is not a formal guarantee; assessments are automated and point-in-time, so combine scores with your own controls and periodic re-checks.

When should I re-check before using an entity?

Re-check before high-impact actions such as installs, upgrades, connecting MCP servers, executing remote code, or granting secrets. Use the API in CI or runtime gates so decisions are based on the latest scan.

Learn more in threat detection docs, how scoring works, and the API overview.

Last Scanned

March 4, 2026

Verdict Scale

safe80–100
caution50–79
suspicious20–49
dangerous0–19

Disclaimer

Assessments are automated and may contain errors. Findings are risk indicators, not confirmed threats. This is a point-in-time assessment; security posture can change.

start scoring agent dependencies.

integrate brin in minutes — one GET request is all it takes. query the api, browse the registry, or download the full dataset.