Is hornyfap.tv safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
35/100

context safety score

A score of 35/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
60
behavior
100
content
0
graph
30

11 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

high

malicious redirect

Dynamically injected third-party script loaded from obfuscated path on 'vigorous-rush.com' — a known ad/malware distribution domain. Script is inserted via self-invoking IIFE with escaped forward slashes to evade static URL detection: \/\/vigorous-rush.com\/coD\/9d6wb.2\/5qlwSEWBQH9mN\/jCYx1\/MQDOML0VNKiC0z2\/N\/jkUfw-MQzzQ\/3i (location: page.html:1328, page-text.txt:1056)

high

obfuscated code

Script source URL uses forward-slash escaping ('\/' instead of '/') to obscure the target domain 'vigorous-rush.com' from static analyzers and content filters. The IIFE wrapper further hides the injection pattern. (location: page.html:1328)

medium

malicious redirect

External ad controller script loaded from 'live.quixova.com' via dynamically created script element. This ad network domain (quixova.com) is associated with aggressive adware and potentially unwanted redirects. Loaded with pid=22347 and a videoslider plugin. (location: page.html:1339)

medium

malicious redirect

Top navigation link points to 'https://a.medfoodsafety.com/loader?a=4800389&s=4787713&t=94&p=18574' — a tracker/loader URL on an unrelated domain (medfoodsafety.com) masquerading as a 'TikTok Porn' link. The loader pattern with affiliate parameters suggests traffic redirection through an intermediary. (location: page.html:180)

medium

malicious redirect

'Live' navigation link redirects through 'go.rmhfrtnd.com/api/goToTheRoom' with a long userId token, routing users through an opaque third-party redirect API rather than directly to the destination. (location: page.html:270)

high

social engineering

Site systematically labels content as 'Leaked', 'PPV Onlyfans Video Leaked', and 'Sex Tape Leaked' throughout all video listings — exploiting users' expectation of stolen private content to drive engagement and ad revenue, while exposing users to potential legal liability and malware through ad networks. (location: page.html:595-1145)

medium

brand impersonation

Site claims copyright dates '2005-2026' and presents itself as an established platform ('HornyFap.com'), while distributing content explicitly labeled as stolen/leaked from OnlyFans creators. This impersonates legitimacy to deceive both users and creators whose brand is exploited in video titles. (location: page.html:1305)

medium

social engineering

Affiliate link to 'golove.ai/anonAuth?ref=hornyfap' uses an authentication endpoint URL ('anonAuth') that implies automatic or anonymous credential handling, potentially confusing users about consent to account creation or data sharing on the destination platform. (location: page.html:215)

low

hidden content

Large block of CSS and JavaScript source code is rendered as visible text within page-text.txt (lines 230-289), indicating these code blocks were not properly enclosed in their HTML containers and may be partially exposed to text extractors/scrapers, leaking implementation details. (location: page-text.txt:230-289)

low

malicious redirect

Link to 'teenager365.to' in top navigation — the domain name combined with adult content context raises concern about age-ambiguous content routing. The .to TLD and opaque domain name obscure the true destination. (location: page.html:203)

API

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

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is hornyfap.tv safe for AI agents to use?

hornyfap.tv currently scores 35/100 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.