Is onlyindianx.cc safe?

suspiciousmedium confidence
47/100

context safety score

A score of 47/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
60
behavior
100
content
30
graph
30

5 threat patterns detected

high

credential harvesting

Login popup (#upblock) collects username and password fields via JavaScript (auth.js) without an explicit HTML form action. Credentials are submitted asynchronously with no visible endpoint, making the destination of harvested credentials opaque. The popup is triggered via a 'show-popup' class link and overlays the page. (location: page.html: #upblock div, Login Form popup, inputs name='username' and name='pass')

medium

hidden content

HTML comments contain commented-out UI elements including a password restore link (/signup.php?action=restore_password) and a 'Join now for free!' CTA that are hidden from the rendered page but present in the DOM. Additionally, a duplicate empty #upblock div is commented out immediately before the real one, suggesting structural obfuscation. (location: page-hidden.txt and page.html: <!-- --> comment blocks near #upblock)

medium

brand impersonation

Domain 'onlyindianx.cc' mimics the well-known 'OnlyFans' brand naming convention (Only + descriptor + X). Uses a .cc TLD commonly associated with low-cost, low-accountability registrations. The schema.org Organization name is empty, and site branding ('Indian HQ Videos') differs from the domain name, indicating deliberate obfuscation of true identity. (location: metadata.json: domain field; page.html: og:site_name meta, schema.org Organization @id)

high

social engineering

Site prominently features 'MMS Scandals' and 'Hidden cam' categories with video titles referencing non-consensual recording and distribution of intimate content (e.g., 'Teenage guy Records and seduces Cheating House Wife', 'Indore village bhabhi fucked in sofa by devar scandal'). This exploits victims' privacy and coerces visitors through shock/scandal content, a known social engineering vector for malware and credential theft campaigns. (location: page-text.txt: video titles and category listings; page.html: category links /categories/mms-scandals/ and /categories/hidden-cam/)

medium

malicious redirect

Push notification script (pab-ssl.js) is loaded with data-id='pushads' and data-site-id='806'. Push ad scripts on adult sites are a well-documented vector for malicious redirects, drive-by downloads, and forced subscriptions. The script is loaded from the same origin but interfaces with an external push ad network (site ID 806). (location: page.html: <script data-id='pushads' data-site-id='806' defer src='/pab-ssl.js?v=0.4'>)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/onlyindianx.cc

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is onlyindianx.cc safe for AI agents to use?

onlyindianx.cc currently scores 47/100 with a suspicious verdict and medium 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.