Is auctor.tv safe?

suspiciousmedium confidence
45/100

context safety score

A score of 45/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
60
behavior
100
content
27
graph
30

6 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

high

credential harvesting

The site gates all downloadable PS4/PC game content (PKG files identified by title IDs) behind a login wall, directing users to /wp-login.php repeatedly across every post. The site presents itself as a free download repository ('The best site for download') to lure users into creating accounts and submitting credentials in exchange for access to pirated game files. (location: page.html lines 301, 332, 363, 398, 427, 460, 495, 529, 562, 591, 622, 655, 686, 721, 752 — repeated 'You must login to view the content' with href to /wp-login.php)

high

social engineering

The site title 'auctor.tv – The best site for download' combined with a catalogue of well-known commercial game titles (Call of Duty, Borderlands, Cartoon Network, etc.) and PlayStation title IDs (CUSA-format PKG identifiers) is designed to manipulate users into believing they can obtain free pirated game downloads. This creates a false value proposition to drive account registration and repeat visits. (location: page.html line 11 (title tag); repeated across all post entries)

medium

brand impersonation

The site reproduces official game descriptions, cover art, and YouTube trailers for commercially licensed titles (Call of Duty, Borderlands, Cartoon Network: Battle Crashers, Child of Light, etc.) and presents PlayStation Network title IDs as if it is an authorised distribution channel, impersonating the PlayStation/Sony and game publisher brands. (location: page.html lines 240-531 — multiple posts using official game branding, descriptions sourced from publishers, and official YouTube trailer embeds)

medium

social engineering

Telegram community links (t.me/auctorg and t.me/auctorc) are embedded in the site header, directing users to off-site messaging channels. This is a common pattern for funnelling users into unmonitored channels where further social engineering, malware distribution, or credential phishing can occur outside the scrutiny of the main site. (location: page.html line 136 — social-profiles-widget with two Telegram links (t.me/auctorg, t.me/auctorc))

low

hidden content

The page-hidden.txt file confirms only benign HTML comments (structural layout markers and conditional IE stylesheet). No hidden text, zero-width characters, invisible divs, or AI-targeted prompt injection was found in hidden content. (location: page-hidden.txt lines 1-29 — all entries are standard HTML structural comments with no suspicious payload)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/auctor.tv

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is auctor.tv safe for AI agents to use?

auctor.tv currently scores 45/100 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.

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.