Is khelosuper.com safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
31/100

context safety score

A score of 31/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
60
behavior
75
content
0
graph
30

9 threat patterns detected

high

hidden instruction

high hidden content ratio detected in DOM

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

high

credential harvesting

The site collects username/email, password, mobile number, and OTP via AJAX forms submitted to /sign-up, /api2/login, /api2/sendLoginOtp, /api2/validateOtp, and /verifyOtpSignup. The site is an unlicensed online gambling platform (real-money gaming with UPI/bank deposits and withdrawals) targeting Indian users, making credential and financial data collection high-risk. The domain is only 336 days old and self-describes as a 'secured entertainment zone' to appear legitimate. (location: page.html:498-683, page.html:1224-1416)

high

social engineering

The site displays fabricated 'recent winner' feeds showing usernames partially redacted (e.g., VEN****11, SAH****11) with large INR winnings (up to ₹47,805) to create false urgency and legitimacy. A welcome popup auto-launches on page load (openDownloadAppPopup called on document.ready) offering 'EXCLUSIVE BONUS ON THE KHELOSUPER APP' and showing a scrolling ticker of fake bonus claims (₹8,000, ₹12,000, ₹15,300 etc.) attributed to anonymous 'players'. A marquee ticker repeatedly promises 100% Welcome Bonus on first deposit to pressure sign-up. (location: page.html:1976-1979, page-text.txt:1608-1676, page-text.txt:2780-2959)

medium

hidden content

An invisible H1 element with class 'foeSEO' and no text content is present at the top of the body (display:none). Additionally, multiple login/registration popup divs are present in the DOM with style='display:none', rendering them invisible to casual visitors but fully functional for programmatic activation. A Hotjar remote vars iframe is explicitly hidden via injected CSS (display:none !important; width:1px; height:1px; opacity:0). The cloneDomain and domain variables in JS reveal a multi-brand cloning infrastructure (domain IDs 1-20), indicating this site is one of many cloned gambling sites operated from shared infrastructure. (location: page.html:193, page.html:158, page.html:246-249)

medium

malicious redirect

After successful login, the JavaScript conditionally redirects to /authenticate?client=affiliate&method=link&user=Xhsdksaaa1772647558&token=1772647558 — a hardcoded affiliate tracking redirect with an embedded timestamp-based token. This redirect is triggered client-side based on an empty string condition, suggesting the redirect URL was left in from a template and may be triggered under specific affiliate referral conditions. There is also an unconditional redirect to /return/redirect?ou on status 304, and notification-click redirects using location.replace(url) from user-controlled data attributes. (location: page.html:1244, page.html:1261, page-text.txt:2475-2482)

medium

social engineering

The site uses a TrafficJunky site verification meta tag (a well-known adult/gambling ad network), confirming this site buys traffic from adult ad networks to drive users to the gambling platform. The platform targets Indian users (hardcoded +91 prefix, INR currency, UPI payment methods) and promotes real-money gambling which is legally restricted in most Indian states, yet presents itself as a 'secured entertainment zone' to obscure its nature. (location: page.html:153, page.html:99-101)

medium

credential harvesting

The affiliate registration form collects full name, email, mobile number, expected sales/revenue, comments, and preferred call times — a broad personal data sweep beyond what is needed for a gaming account, exposed in a modal popup. The form uses a honeypot fake username/password field (class='fakeusernamepassword') to evade bot detection while still collecting real data. (location: page.html:1639-1712)

low

hidden content

The CSRF token value 'PGKG1ih91lNWSSBaNKj0z9MAc4segUN6qiAiNrRd' is hardcoded as a static string in at least 8 separate inline JavaScript AJAX calls throughout the page rather than being dynamically fetched from the meta tag, making it a fixed, predictable token that weakens CSRF protection and could be exploited by attackers who have read the HTML source. (location: page.html:590, page.html:668, page.html:716, page.html:1387, page.html:1196)

API

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

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is khelosuper.com safe for AI agents to use?

khelosuper.com currently scores 31/100 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.