Is bokepav.net safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
38/100

context safety score

A score of 38/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
100
behavior
55
content
0
graph
53

8 threat patterns detected

high

malicious redirect

The scanned URL is bokepav.net but the page's canonical URL, all internal links, favicon, logo, CSS assets, and form actions all point to www.sexjepang.net — the page is silently serving content from a completely different domain, indicating a domain-spoofing/redirect front that funnels traffic from bokepav.net to sexjepang.net without user awareness. (location: page.html:237 (canonical), page.html:298 (logo href), page.html:303 (search form action), page.html:11-12 (favicon))

high

obfuscated code

A large inline script in the footer uses a rot-style character-shift obfuscation routine: it encodes strings with a Caesar-cipher-like offset map (`(n+e)%95`) then decodes them at runtime using `String.fromCharCode`. The decoded payload drives ad-popping and redirect logic. The obfuscation is deliberately designed to hide the script's true behavior from static analysis. (location: page.html:622 (large obfuscated inline script block))

high

malicious redirect

An obfuscated ad-network script is loaded from `//bartererfaxtingling.com/in.js` with `data-clipid='2071574'`. The domain name is a known ad-injector/pop-under network. The script is loaded async with error/load callbacks (`onerror='jwhzj(17)' onload='jwhzj(17)'`) referencing the obfuscated payload above, confirming integration with the obfuscated redirect system. (location: page.html:623)

high

malicious redirect

An explicit pop-under ad trigger is implemented: `aclib.runPop({zoneId:'10023574'})` is called via `//acscdn.com/script/aclib.js`. The script throttles pops to once per 15 minutes using localStorage and fires on a `video_played` postMessage event from an iframe, creating covert pop-under redirects triggered by user video interaction. (location: page.html:594-619)

medium

social engineering

The site presents a registration and login modal ('Join SEX JEPANG') collecting username, email, and password from users. Combined with the domain mismatch (bokepav.net serving sexjepang.net content), users may believe they are registering on one site while credentials are actually submitted to a different domain's endpoint. (location: page.html:644-662 (register form), page.html:670-684 (login form))

high

credential harvesting

Login and registration forms collect username, email, and password and POST them to `https://www.sexjepang.net/` — a domain different from the scanned domain (bokepav.net). Users visiting bokepav.net who log in are submitting credentials cross-domain to sexjepang.net, which constitutes credential harvesting via domain front. (location: page.html:644 (register form action), page.html:670 (login form action))

medium

hidden content

The Histats tracker noscript tag contains an anchor `<a href='/' target='_blank'>` wrapping a 1x1 transparent GIF (`//sstatic1.histats.com/0.gif?4887850&101`). This is a tracking pixel disguised as a noscript fallback, invisibly tracking users even without JavaScript. (location: page.html:591)

medium

brand impersonation

The page footer states 'All rights reserved. Bokepjepang.cam' — a third domain distinct from both the scanned domain (bokepav.net) and the served domain (sexjepang.net). The site operates under at least three different domain identities simultaneously, a pattern consistent with brand/identity obfuscation used in traffic arbitrage and ad fraud schemes. (location: page.html:579, page-text.txt:287)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/bokepav.net

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is bokepav.net safe for AI agents to use?

bokepav.net currently scores 38/100 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 7, 2026

Verdict Scale

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

Trust Graph

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.