Is naga-50.xyz safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
29/100

context safety score

A score of 29/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
50
behavior
80
content
0
graph
30

13 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

medium

malicious redirect

script/meta redirect patterns detected in page source

high

js obfuscation

JavaScript uses Function constructor for runtime code generation

high

phishing

The site operates on the domain naga-50.xyz (a numeric subdomain-style .xyz TLD) but presents itself as 'Naga Empire' with canonical URLs pointing to nagaempireid.com. The actual serving domain diverges from the canonical brand domain, a classic indicator of a phishing or lookalike site designed to capture user registrations and deposits from users searching for the legitimate platform. (location: page.html:16 (canonical href), metadata.json (domain: naga-50.xyz))

high

brand impersonation

The site presents as 'Naga Empire – Situs Resmi dan Informasi Platform' (claiming to be the official site) while serving from naga-50.xyz. Meta tags, OG tags, schema.org markup, and all branding reference nagaempireid.com as the real URL, while the actual serving domain is naga-50.xyz — a pattern consistent with brand impersonation of the legitimate NagaEmpire gambling platform. (location: page.html:10-24, page.html:120-146)

high

credential harvesting

The site presents MASUK (Login) and DAFTAR (Register) buttons linked to https://naga-50.xyz/masuk and https://naga-50.xyz/daftar. Users who believe they are on the legitimate nagaempireid.com will submit credentials to the attacker-controlled naga-50.xyz domain. Multiple game provider tiles across the page also redirect to /masuk when clicked, funneling users toward credential submission. (location: page.html:547-554, page.html:920-960)

high

malicious redirect

JavaScript on page load fires an AJAX GET to https://naga-50.xyz/get-configuration?ref_id= and unconditionally executes window.location.href = data.redirect if data.redirect is non-null. This allows the server to silently redirect any visitor to an arbitrary URL at runtime, enabling dynamic phishing redirection that is invisible in static HTML analysis. (location: page.html:1668-1674)

medium

social engineering

The page uses aggressive bonus marketing in banner carousel alt texts: 'BONUS NEW MEMBER +20%', 'EXTRA BONUS +50%', 'BONUS NEXT DEPOSIT VIA BANK +10%', 'BONUS AJAK TEMAN KE GROUP TELEGRAM', and 'DOUBLE BONUS MINGGUAN'. These are designed to lure users into registering accounts and making financial deposits on the fraudulent domain. (location: page.html:714-750)

medium

malicious redirect

Two shortened/obfuscated outbound links are present in the circular menu: https://tinyurl.com/NAGAEMPIREWADSINI (labeled WHATSAPP) and https://bit.ly/buktijpnagaempire (labeled BUKTI JP). URL shorteners obscure the true destination and are commonly used to bypass URL-based security filters and redirect users to external attacker-controlled resources. (location: page.html:1193-1200)

medium

hidden content

The GTM noscript iframe uses negative dimension values (height='-80' width='-80') which is anomalous and non-standard. While Google Tag Manager is legitimate, the negative dimensions deviate from canonical GTM implementation and could be used to mask additional tracking or payload delivery in non-JS environments. (location: page.html:80-81)

medium

hidden content

The server-side AJAX endpoint /get-configuration dynamically injects unsanitized HTML into the modal body via $('.modal-body').append(data.setting_welcome.description), and also appends a server-controlled image URL. This allows the server to inject arbitrary HTML/content into the page at runtime without it being visible in the static HTML, enabling hidden content delivery or further payload injection. (location: page.html:1676-1684)

low

social engineering

The announcement ticker instructs users to 'pay close attention to the destination bank account number before making a transfer to avoid mistakes' (Harap perhatikan Nomer Rekening tujuan Deposit). This primes users to accept dynamically-served bank account numbers for deposits, which are served via the server-controlled /get-configuration endpoint and could be attacker-controlled accounts. (location: page.html:790-791)

low

brand impersonation

The site uses two separate Facebook Pixel IDs (1327797429374620 and 1314097453739468) duplicated with the same initialization code block. Dual pixel firing is used to track conversions across multiple ad accounts, suggesting coordinated paid advertising campaigns driving traffic to this impersonation site. (location: page.html:84-118)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/naga-50.xyz

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is naga-50.xyz safe for AI agents to use?

naga-50.xyz currently scores 29/100 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.