Is boy18tube.com safe?

suspiciousmedium confidence
49/100

context safety score

A score of 49/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
100
behavior
80
content
24
graph
30

7 threat patterns detected

high

js obfuscation

JavaScript uses Function constructor for runtime code generation

high

malicious redirect

Navigation menu contains multiple outbound links to third-party ad/traffic broker domains (trustpielote.com zones 300, 301, 302 and fhgte.com) disguised as legitimate site sections ('AI JERK OFF', 'Live Sex', 'HD Porn', 'VOD'). These are affiliate traffic redirect links that route users through opaque intermediary domains with no clear disclosure. (location: page.html lines 201-226, nav menu <ul id='sf-menu'>)

medium

malicious redirect

Third-party ad script loaded from stats.hprofits.com (advertisement.min.js) — an ad network domain with no transparency. This script runs synchronously in the page head and has full DOM access, capable of injecting redirects or tracking beacons. (location: page.html line 40: <script src='https://stats.hprofits.com/advertisement.min.js'>)

medium

malicious redirect

Native ad content injected dynamically via NativeAdTrade library loaded from cdn26121759.ahacdn.me/native4/main.js — an obfuscated CDN subdomain. The library inserts video thumbnails and links into the page pointing to gayporn.xxx, a separate domain not disclosed to the user. This pattern can be used for cloaked traffic redirection. (location: page.html lines 964-990, 1521-1546 (repeated pattern throughout page at each ad placeholder block))

medium

social engineering

Menu items 'AI JERK OFF', 'Live Sex', 'HD Porn', and 'VOD' are styled identically to legitimate navigation items but link to external third-party traffic broker URLs (trustpielote.com, fhgte.com), misleading users into clicking affiliate redirect links while believing they are navigating within the site. (location: page.html lines 201-226)

low

hidden content

Multiple empty placeholder <div class='thumb js-thumb placeholder'> elements with blank href attributes are scattered throughout the page. These are populated at runtime by the NativeAdTrade external script, meaning the actual destination URLs and content are not present in the static HTML and cannot be inspected — effectively hiding ad destinations from static analysis. (location: page.html lines 803-831, 1360-1388, 1917-1945, 2474-2502 (repeating pattern))

low

social engineering

Page meta referrer policy set to 'unsafe-url', which sends the full URL (including any query parameters) as the Referer header to all external destinations including third-party ad networks and redirect brokers. This leaks user browsing context to external parties without disclosure. (location: page.html line 5: <meta name='referrer' content='unsafe-url'>)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/boy18tube.com

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is boy18tube.com safe for AI agents to use?

boy18tube.com currently scores 49/100 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.