Is myflixerz.to safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
30/100

context safety score

A score of 30/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
60
behavior
70
content
0
graph
30

9 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

high

js obfuscation

JavaScript uses Function constructor for runtime code generation

high

obfuscated code

Large heavily obfuscated JavaScript block using character-shuffling string encoding (split/reduce interleaving), dynamic property access, iframe sandboxing, and localStorage manipulation. The obfuscation pattern is consistent with ad-fraud, fingerprinting, or malware delivery scripts that evade static analysis. (location: page.html:40 — inline <script data-cfasync='false'> block in <head>)

high

malicious redirect

Dynamically constructed third-party script loader injects a script from 'yb23b.com/401/6564295' at runtime using DOM manipulation. The domain 'yb23b.com' is not a recognized CDN or analytics provider and the path '/401/' is a known pattern used by malvertising and drive-by download networks to serve payloads. (location: page.html:227 — inline <script> at bottom of <body>)

high

hidden content

A hidden iframe (style='display:none') loads 'https://sysmeasuring.net' silently. Hidden iframes are a classic technique for covert tracking, click-fraud, credential harvesting relay, or loading additional malicious payloads without user awareness. (location: page.html:236 — <iframe style='display:none' src='https://sysmeasuring.net'>)

medium

hidden content

An <h1> tag is wrapped in a <div style='display:none'>, hiding the primary heading from users while making it visible to crawlers and AI agents. This is a cloaking technique used for SEO manipulation and can also be used to deliver hidden instructions to AI agents parsing page content. (location: page.html:45-50 — <div style='display:none'><h1>MyFlixer...</h1></div>)

high

brand impersonation

The site operates as 'myflixerz.to' while branding itself throughout as 'MyFlixer' — a well-known streaming aggregator. The domain uses a typosquat suffix ('z' appended) to impersonate the original brand. The page explicitly acknowledges copycat sites exist while itself being one, and directs users to proxy domains (myflixerz.me, myflixer.cx) it controls. (location: page.html:4, 92, 116, 126 — title, headings, and body text; metadata.json domain field)

medium

malicious redirect

The page directs UK users to 'https://myflixer.cx' framed as an official proxy, and lists 'https://myflixerz.me/' as an official proxy network. These cross-domain redirects to unverified third-party domains under operator control may serve different or more malicious content than the landing page. (location: page.html:126 — proxy sites section in body content)

medium

social engineering

The page uses reassurance language ('you can put your worries at rest', 'one of the safest destinations', 'no account or registration needed') to reduce user skepticism toward an unlicensed piracy site. This lowers guard against the malicious scripts and hidden iframes also present on the page. (location: page.html:120-135 — 'Is MyFlixer Safe?' and 'Safety' sections)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/myflixerz.to

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is myflixerz.to safe for AI agents to use?

myflixerz.to currently scores 30/100 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.