context safety score
A score of 35/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.
encoded payload
suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content
phishing
1 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host
obfuscated code
Large inline script uses decodeURI() on a heavily percent-encoded string followed by a Caesar-cipher-style character rotation (charCode offset + position modulo 95) to reconstruct and execute hidden payloads at runtime. The decoded content and its downstream behavior cannot be inspected statically. (location: page.html:277 (inline <script data-cfasync='false'>!function(){...}))
malicious redirect
Script loaded from //badlandlispyippee.com/on.js — a domain with a deceptive, nonsensical name typical of malvertising and drive-by redirect networks. Loaded asynchronously with onerror/onload callbacks that invoke the obfuscated hsfgq() function, suggesting conditional redirect or payload delivery logic. (location: page.html:278 (<script ... src='//badlandlispyippee.com/on.js'>))
hidden content
All thumbnail images are loaded as a 1×1 transparent GIF placeholder () with actual image URLs deferred to data-original and data-webp attributes. While lazy-loading is common, combined with the obfuscated JS this pattern can be used to obscure the true nature of content from automated scanners. (location: page.html:309, 348, 387 (and throughout — all video thumbnails))
social engineering
The site aggregates and distributes non-consensual or voyeur-category content (categories: IPCAM, Toilet, Voyeur JP) and deepfake pornography (linked affiliate site deepfakesporn.com), which constitutes deceptive content designed to exploit real individuals and lure users under false premises. (location: page.html:232-263 (navigation menu — Voyeur section and Sites dropdown linking to deepfakesporn.com, fakekpop.com))
credential harvesting
Login and signup forms are loaded via AJAX into a fancybox modal overlay (data-fancybox='ajax') sourced from kissjav.li/login/ and kissjav.li/signup/. Modal-based credential forms bypass standard browser security indicators and can be spoofed or injected by co-loaded third-party ad scripts. (location: page.html:119-120, 142-143 (header login/signup links with data-fancybox='ajax'))
malicious redirect
Third-party ad scripts loaded from cdn.tsyndicate.com (banner and popunder spots) and a.magsrv.com / a.pemsrv.com are known ad-network domains associated with aggressive popunder, redirect, and malvertising campaigns on adult content sites. (location: page.html:274, 280, 1510-1516, 1527-1529)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/kissjav.liCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
kissjav.li 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
integrate brin in minutes — one GET request is all it takes. query the api, browse the registry, or download the full dataset.