Is hianime.to safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
37/100

context safety score

A score of 37/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
60
behavior
70
content
17
graph
30

6 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

high

js obfuscation

JavaScript uses Function constructor for runtime code generation

high

obfuscated code

Two nearly identical heavily obfuscated JavaScript blocks are injected at the bottom of the page (lines 540-541 in page.html). The code uses a string-interleave decode technique ('ChmaorrCfozd...'.split('').reduce((B,J,R)=>R%2?B+J:J+B).split('z')) to reconstruct method names at runtime, then dynamically creates hidden iframes, wraps document APIs, intercepts querySelector calls, and manipulates localStorage/sessionStorage. This pattern is characteristic of malvertising loaders and ad-fraud scripts. The script is loaded from yb23b.com (data-verifysrc attribute) and runs without CSP restrictions. (location: page.html:540-541, data-verifysrc=https://yb23b.com/vignette.min.js)

high

malicious redirect

The obfuscated script (loaded via https://yb23b.com/vignette.min.js) creates hidden iframes and intercepts document.createElement calls, a well-known technique used by ad-fraud and malvertising infrastructure to silently load third-party content, execute redirects, or serve pop-under ads outside user visibility. The domain yb23b.com has no clear legitimate affiliation with HiAnime. (location: page.html:540, data-verifysrc=https://yb23b.com/vignette.min.js)

medium

hidden content

Commented-out ad script block references 'pubbidgeartag' with zone ID 10411 and captures window.location.href. While currently disabled via HTML comments, this ad network integration code (lines 252-265) was previously active and transmits the visitor's current URL to a third-party ad network, which can be used for tracking or retargeting without user consent. (location: page.html:252-265)

low

social engineering

The site explicitly promotes itself as 'safe' and claims to actively scan ads 24/7, building false trust with users while simultaneously embedding obfuscated third-party scripts. This trust-building language ('Is HiAnime.to safe? Yes we are...') contradicts the actual presence of opaque, unvetted code from external domains. (location: page.html:181-185, page-text.txt:111-115)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/hianime.to

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is hianime.to safe for AI agents to use?

hianime.to currently scores 37/100 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.