Is mangaraw.ac safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
41/100

context safety score

A score of 41/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
90
behavior
100
content
0
graph
30

8 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

obfuscated code

A large inline JavaScript block uses a Caesar-cipher/character-rotation obfuscation technique: a long encoded string literal is decoded at runtime via charCodeAt arithmetic and String.fromCharCode, then split into substrings by a pre-computed index array. This pattern is used to hide the actual URLs, API calls, and logic from static analysis. The same block appears twice (inline in <script> tag at line 1632 and rendered in page-text.txt line 1477). (location: page.html:1632 / page-text.txt:1477)

high

malicious redirect

An external script is loaded from 'gigglegrowlworrisome.com/bn.js' — a third-party domain with no relation to the site, a randomly-generated-looking hostname typical of ad-fraud or malvertising networks. It carries both onerror and onload callbacks ('ugkhmoc(16)') that trigger obfuscated JavaScript, and uses data-cfasync='false' to bypass Cloudflare script inspection. This pattern is commonly used for drive-by redirects or payload delivery. (location: page.html:1633)

medium

hidden content

A <script> tag at line 45 loads an external JS file from 'lib.cdnlibjs.com' (not a legitimate CDN) with a fake 'headroom@1.2.1' path, using a 'data-domain' attribute set to 'mlflkrfhtkac.a' — a non-existent TLD used as a tracking/analytics beacon identifier. The domain 'cdnlibjs.com' masquerades as a CDN but is unrelated to any known open-source library host. (location: page.html:45)

medium

brand impersonation

The site impersonates multiple well-known commercial manga publishing brands (One Piece/ワンピース, Blue Lock/ブルーロック, Jujutsu Kaisen/呪術廻戦, Kingdom/キングダム, etc.) by hosting and distributing their copyrighted content for free. It uses these brand names prominently in titles, metadata keywords, og:title, and twitter:title tags to attract search engine traffic and deceive users into thinking this is an authorized source. (location: page.html:13-27, throughout manga listings)

medium

social engineering

Keyboard shortcut blocking (Ctrl+Shift+I, Ctrl+Shift+J, Ctrl+U, F12) and right-click context menu disabling are implemented to prevent users from inspecting the page source or the obfuscated scripts. This anti-inspection behavior is a social engineering tactic to hide malicious or unauthorized activity from technically aware users. (location: page.html:1637 / page-text.txt:1481-1482)

low

hidden content

Fabricated structured data (LocalBusiness schema) includes a fake Japanese business address, phone number, and geo-coordinates with an impossible longitude value (139139.780732, valid range is -180 to 180). This fake legitimacy signal is injected into the page to manipulate search engine trust signals and SEO ranking, deceiving both crawlers and users about the site's legitimacy. (location: page.html:47-88)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/mangaraw.ac

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is mangaraw.ac safe for AI agents to use?

mangaraw.ac currently scores 41/100 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.