Is komikindo.ch 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
100
content
0
graph
30

9 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

high

cloaking

Page conditionally redirects based on referrer or user-agent

high

js obfuscation

JavaScript uses Function constructor for runtime code generation

medium

js obfuscation

Obfuscated document.write with encoded content

high

malicious redirect

Two third-party scripts loaded from suspicious obfuscated domains: qk.windowylarvule.com and ew.ileacringes.com. These use randomized subdomain/path patterns typical of malvertising or ad-fraud networks and are injected as lazy-load scripts near the page footer. (location: page.html:3318-3319)

medium

social engineering

Site notice urgently directs users to abandon the current domain and bookmark alternative domains (Komikindo.dev, Komikindo.cv), citing domain blocking. This creates urgency to follow users to potentially uncontrolled or less-secure mirror sites. The primary recommended domain uses HTTP (not HTTPS): http://komikindo.cv (location: page.html:925-927, page-text.txt:775-776)

medium

malicious redirect

APK download link routes through the URL shortener https://s.id/komikindo, obscuring the true destination. Users are encouraged to download an unofficial Android APK outside of any app store, which may deliver malicious software. (location: page.html:928-930, page-text.txt:777)

low

hidden content

A 1x1 pixel invisible iframe (position:absolute, visibility:hidden) is injected by a Cloudflare challenge script that dynamically creates and appends a script element loading /cdn-cgi/challenge-platform/scripts/jsd/main.js. While standard Cloudflare bot detection, the pattern of injecting hidden iframes that execute scripts is consistent with hidden content techniques. (location: page.html:3399)

low

credential harvesting

A login modal form collecting username and password is rendered in the page DOM before the body tag, submitting credentials via AJAX to /wp-admin/admin-ajax.php. While consistent with a standard WordPress login, credentials are submitted to the same potentially-compromised domain hosting suspicious third-party scripts. (location: page.html:148-163)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/komikindo.ch

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is komikindo.ch safe for AI agents to use?

komikindo.ch 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.