Is hqporn.xxx safe?

suspiciousmedium confidence
47/100

context safety score

A score of 47/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
100
behavior
100
content
11
graph
30

9 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

malicious redirect

Navigation menu links labeled 'Live Sex', 'Full Videos', 'TIKTOK PORN', and 'AI JERK OFF🔥' all point to https://trustpielote.com/resource?zones=786/784/785/1512 — an opaque third-party redirect/traffic-broker domain that obscures the final destination. The 'tabUnder' popup config (window.hpPpConfig.tabUnder=true) is also set, enabling background tab-under ad redirects on any gallery link click. (location: page.html lines 132-146, 4682-4688)

medium

malicious redirect

Third-party ad script loaded from https://stats.hprofits.com/advertisement.min.js — an adult ad-network domain not belonging to the site operator. This script runs synchronously at page load with full DOM access and can redirect users or inject arbitrary content. (location: page.html line 34)

medium

malicious redirect

Additional third-party ad scripts loaded from https://a.magsrv.com/ad-provider.js and https://js.mbidadm.com/static/scripts.js, and a redirect renderer from https://cdn.trustpielote.com/rdr/renderer.js. These external scripts have full page control and can perform redirects or pop-unders without user consent. (location: page.html lines 4532, 4692, 4694)

low

hidden content

Yandex Metrika tracking pixel embedded as a 1×1 image positioned at left:-9999px inside a noscript tag, making it invisible to users. This silently tracks visits even when JavaScript is disabled. (location: page.html line 75)

low

hidden content

Multiple conflicting 'meta name=referrer' directives present (unsafe-url, always, origin) in the page head. The 'unsafe-url' value causes full URLs including query strings and path to be sent as the Referer header to all third-party destinations, leaking user browsing context to ad networks and trackers. (location: page.html lines 5, 10, 13)

medium

social engineering

Tab-under popup mechanism explicitly configured (window.hpPpConfig.tabUnder=true, triggerMethod:2) tied to all gallery/category/pornstar link clicks. This silently opens a new background tab to an advertiser destination without user intent, a classic dark-pattern social engineering technique used to drive traffic to third-party sites. (location: page.html lines 4681-4689)

low

prompt injection

The page's template engine renders raw comment content server-side via Vue.js interpolation (${comment.content}) without apparent sanitization visible in the static HTML. If user-supplied comment text is injected into the page, it could contain instructions targeting AI agents or crawlers that parse the rendered page text. The page-text.txt extraction includes all raw template markup verbatim. (location: page.html lines 489-490, page-text.txt lines 187-419)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/hqporn.xxx

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is hqporn.xxx safe for AI agents to use?

hqporn.xxx currently scores 47/100 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.