Is jugantor.com safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
43/100

context safety score

A score of 43/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
100
behavior
60
content
17
graph
30

7 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

medium

malicious redirect

script/meta redirect patterns detected in page source

high

js obfuscation

JavaScript uses Function constructor for runtime code generation

high

obfuscated code

Heavily obfuscated JavaScript using multiple layers of percent-encoded URI components (decodeURI(decodeURI(...))), self-executing anonymous functions, and dynamic script injection. The code decodes to access 'googletag' and 'adiral' globals while loading an external script from 'evasivejar.com'. The domain name 'evasivejar' itself is suspicious and suggestive of intentional evasion. The obfuscation pattern exceeds what legitimate ad code requires. (location: page.html:321-323 (monetisemore header script block))

high

malicious redirect

An external JavaScript file is dynamically injected from 'https://evasivejar.com/assets/penhvyidyrot.index.js' — a domain with an evasion-themed name loading an opaque script with a randomized filename. This script executes in full page context and can perform arbitrary redirects, credential harvesting, or ad fraud. The same injection code appears twice (duplicate lines 321 and 323). (location: page.html:321-323)

medium

hidden content

A sidebar flex-slider div is explicitly set to visibility:hidden and height:0px via inline styles, making its content invisible to users while still present in the DOM and accessible to crawlers and AI agents. The hidden carousel contains news article links and images. (location: page.html:1120 (.flexslider2MainDiv with style='visibility: hidden;height: 0px;overflow: hidden;'))

low

hidden content

The TLS certificate expires in only 14 days (days_until_expiry: 14), which is atypical for a legitimate high-traffic news site that would normally auto-renew well in advance. While not a direct content threat, imminent cert expiry can be a precursor to site takeover or indicate abandoned/compromised infrastructure. (location: metadata.json:tls.days_until_expiry=14)

API

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

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is jugantor.com safe for AI agents to use?

jugantor.com currently scores 43/100 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.