Is naijaprey.tv safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
37/100

context safety score

A score of 37/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
80
behavior
80
content
4
graph
30

8 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

high

cloaking

Page loads content in transparent or zero-size iframe overlay

high

malicious redirect

JavaScript attached to all '.mh-loop-title' click events silently opens a third-party URL (https://goonsupper.com/yhmf3t3721?key=35fbdcc1073018c82ab29b3b16df0f70) in a new tab instead of the intended content link. Users clicking any movie or series title are redirected to an external ad/affiliate domain without consent. (location: page.html:3469-3476 and page.html:1912-1918 (duplicate inline block); page-text.txt:1911-1918)

medium

hidden content

A notification banner with class 'd-none' (CSS: display:none!important; visibility:hidden!important) reads: '"Allow Ads" & "Popups" on Chrome to prevent redirection of your browsers!' — this text is hidden from normal view but is accessible to screen readers and web-crawling agents. It instructs users to enable popups, facilitating further ad/redirect exploitation. (location: page.html:1545)

medium

social engineering

Visible (on mobile) and hidden (on desktop) banner message urges users to 'Allow Ads' and 'Popups' to 'prevent redirection', which is a deceptive social-engineering tactic — enabling popups in fact enables the malicious redirect and ad-injection behaviour rather than preventing it. (location: page.html:1545; page-text.txt:27)

high

malicious redirect

Third-party ad script loaded from '//de.fletherpetos.com/rj1zHREm2YZm0i/117543' — an obfuscated, low-reputation domain injected inline alongside the click-hijacking redirect code. This pattern is consistent with malvertising infrastructure. (location: page.html:3468)

low

hidden content

Push notification SDK loaded from 'https://push-sdk.com/f/sdk.js?z=1688113' dynamically appended to document head, tracking click_id and source_id URL parameters. This silently solicits push-notification permissions and facilitates covert user tracking without visible disclosure. (location: page.html:1519-1539; page-text.txt:1-20)

low

social engineering

SEO metadata description references competitor brand names ('netnaija', 'net9ja', 'fzmovies') to capture search traffic from users seeking those legitimate sites, drawing them to naijaprey.tv instead. This is a brand-adjacent traffic-hijacking technique. (location: page.html:16,23,33 (meta description and OG tags))

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/naijaprey.tv

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is naijaprey.tv safe for AI agents to use?

naijaprey.tv currently scores 37/100 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.