context safety score
A score of 46/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.
encoded payload
suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content
obfuscated code
Large obfuscated JavaScript block using URL-encoded string decoding, character rotation cipher (Caesar-style shift by position index mod 95), and array slicing to reconstruct code at runtime. The script is loaded with data-cfasync="false" to bypass Cloudflare async filtering, and uses decodeURI + custom charCodeAt transformation to hide actual payload. Origin domain is cockygoodness.com, a known ad/malvertising network. (location: page.html:864-866 and page-text.txt:840 — inline <script data-cfasync="false"> block)
malicious redirect
External JavaScript loaded from cockygoodness.com (02eb34d81ef45cb1a5a3f444fd16a5dd.js) and endlesshandbaglinked.com (on.js) — both third-party domains unrelated to aflamk1.net. These are known malvertising/redirect network domains that commonly serve popunder ads, forced redirects, and exploit kits. The onload/onerror callbacks invoke jpfnahh(15), a function defined within the obfuscated block. (location: page.html:864,867 — <script src="https://cockygoodness.com/..."> and <script src="//endlesshandbaglinked.com/on.js">)
obfuscated code
All first-party JavaScript <script> tags use a non-standard type attribute value '63c2748c112e5c676b3c9225-text/javascript' instead of 'text/javascript'. This is a Cloudflare Rocket Loader technique that defers script execution, but it also obscures which scripts are active and can be used to mask payload delivery timing. The rocket-loader script at the bottom then activates all deferred scripts simultaneously. (location: page.html:16,886,887,895 — type="63c2748c112e5c676b3c9225-text/javascript" on multiple script tags)
hidden content
Two empty anchor elements in the navigation (<a href="" id="item10"></a> and <a href="" id="item11"></a>) with no visible text or destination. These serve no navigational purpose and may be placeholders for dynamic injection of hidden links or tracking pixels via JavaScript. (location: page.html:78-82 — <li><a href="" id="item10"></a></li> and <li><a href="" id="item11"></a></li>)
social engineering
The site presents incest/taboo adult content (محارم = incest, step-family scenarios) prominently normalized across all navigation categories and video listings. The content framing — translated titles depicting family sexual exploitation scenarios — is consistent with social engineering patterns used to normalize boundary-violating behavior and desensitize users, which is a recognized vector for grooming-adjacent content distribution. (location: page.html:63-75, 97-727 — navigation categories and video listing titles throughout the page)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/aflamk1.netCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
aflamk1.net currently scores 46/100 with a suspicious verdict and medium 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
integrate brin in minutes — one GET request is all it takes. query the api, browse the registry, or download the full dataset.