Is tapminings.com safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
25/100

context safety score

A score of 25/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
20
behavior
100
content
0
graph
30

6 threat patterns detected

high

tls connection failed

Could not establish TLS connection

high

phishing

Site presents a 'tap-to-earn' scheme claiming users can collect coins/diamonds and convert them to real money via e-wallets (Dana, OVO, GoPay, ShopeePay). This is a classic advance-fee / fake earnings scam pattern targeting Indonesian users, designed to harvest credentials and financial account details via login.html and register.html flows. (location: page.html: hero section (lines 296-303), features section (lines 322-323, 335-337))

high

credential harvesting

The site has dedicated login.html and register.html pages linked from the landing page. Combined with no valid TLS (TLS connected=false, cert_valid=false), any credentials submitted are transmitted insecurely. The registration flow collecting user accounts linked to real e-wallet identities (Dana, OVO, GoPay, ShopeePay) is a credential harvesting vector. (location: page.html line 289 (login.html link), line 299 (register.html link); metadata.json TLS fields)

high

social engineering

The site uses a gamified 'tap-tap' earn-money premise to psychologically manipulate users into registering and linking financial accounts. The level progression system (Silver, Gold, Platinum) and promise of withdrawals to popular Indonesian e-wallets are social engineering tactics designed to build false trust and encourage financial account linking. (location: page.html lines 308-353 (features section), lines 296-303 (hero section))

critical

phishing

Site operates without a valid TLS certificate (connected=false, cert_valid=false, san_match=false) while soliciting user registration and login. All credentials and personal data are transmitted without encryption, enabling trivial interception. The domain is only 113 days old, consistent with a newly spun-up phishing/scam infrastructure. (location: metadata.json: tls block; domain_age_days=113)

medium

hidden content

An external JavaScript file js/security.js is loaded at the end of the body (line 404). This file is not inline and its contents are not available for analysis — it could contain obfuscated credential skimming, form data exfiltration, or anti-debugging logic. The filename 'security.js' is a common social-engineering label used to disguise malicious scripts. (location: page.html line 404: <script src="js/security.js"></script>)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/tapminings.com

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is tapminings.com safe for AI agents to use?

tapminings.com currently scores 25/100 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.