Is leaktube.net safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
38/100

context safety score

A score of 38/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
90
behavior
70
content
0
graph
70

13 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

medium

cloaking

Page checks user-agent for bot/crawler strings to serve different 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

medium

js obfuscation

Very long base64 or hex string assigned in JavaScript — likely encoded payload

high

obfuscated code

Heavily obfuscated JavaScript block using multi-stage decode: URL-percent-encoding decode followed by character rotation cipher applied to a long encoded string. The script dynamically reconstructs function names, URLs, and script injection logic at runtime, making static analysis impossible. This pattern is characteristic of malvertising loaders or drive-by download initiators. (location: page.html:170 — inline <script data-cfasync="false">!function(){"use strict";for(var n=decodeURI("wd%60andp%5E...")

high

malicious redirect

Script tag loading from third-party domain '//improperscrubbedvendor.com/on.js' with data-cfasync="false" to bypass Cloudflare rocket-loader. The domain name 'improperscrubbedvendor.com' is highly suspicious and not a recognized ad network. The async script loaded from this domain executes a callback function 'ebnlezv(15)' on both load and error, indicating tracking/redirect logic regardless of outcome. (location: page.html:171 — <script data-cfasync="false" data-clocid="2089807" async src="//improperscrubbedvendor.com/on.js")

high

malicious redirect

Six suspicious third-party domains are pre-connected via <link rel="preconnect"> in the page head: bartererfaxtingling.com, chestgoingpunch.com, preferencenail.com, professionaltrafficmonitor.com, skinnycrawlinglax.com, tellpicturesquedistress.com. These are all algorithmically-named domains (characteristic of domain generation algorithms or ad-fraud networks) that will receive DNS and connection data for every visitor. None are recognized CDN or ad-network domains. (location: page.html:93 — <link rel="preconnect" href="https://bartererfaxtingling.com" ...> and five similar entries)

medium

social engineering

Site prominently advertises and distributes non-consensually shared intimate images ('leaked sextapes', 'exposed', 'naked videos') of named real individuals identified by location and social platform (e.g. 'Leaked Sex Tapes of South African Model & TV Host Cindy Makhathini', 'Naked Video of Mary From Aba', 'KNUST Girl Anita'). The site solicits user-uploaded content via 'UPLOAD LEAK' to crowdsource acquisition of non-consensual intimate imagery, which constitutes a social engineering ecosystem targeting victims. (location: page.html:843 and throughout content listings; page-text.txt:387,584,639,698,792,839)

medium

hidden content

Ad insertion framework (AI plugin) uses base64-encoded payloads stored in data-code attributes that are decoded and injected into the DOM at runtime via createContextualFragment(). The base64 payload in the ai-viewport div (page.html:607) decodes to an iframe loading from acceptable.a-ads.com — the indirection through base64 hides the actual third-party ad destination from static scanners. (location: page.html:607 — data-code='PGRpdiBjbGFzcz0nY29kZS1ibG9jayBjb2RlLWJsb2Nr...' within div.ai-viewports)

medium

malicious redirect

TLS certificate expires in only 12 days (days_until_expiry: 12). While not a redirect, a near-expiry DV certificate on a site serving third-party scripts and ad payloads increases risk of certificate mis-issuance or domain takeover coinciding with expiry, particularly given the suspicious third-party script ecosystem already present. (location: metadata.json — tls.days_until_expiry: 12)

low

social engineering

Prominent 'JOIN New Telegram' call-to-action linking to t.me/+Cu-YEOJg2u9hNGNk drives users to an unverified Telegram channel, a common vector for further malware distribution, scam links, or credential harvesting in the adult content niche. (location: page.html:843 — <a href="https://t.me/+Cu-YEOJg2u9hNGNk" target="_blank">JOIN 🔥New Telegram</a>)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/leaktube.net

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is leaktube.net safe for AI agents to use?

leaktube.net currently scores 38/100 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.