Is toto12atlanta.net safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
35/100

context safety score

A score of 35/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
100
behavior
50
content
0
graph
30

15 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

high

cloaking

Page conditionally redirects based on referrer or user-agent

high

cloaking

Page loads content in transparent or zero-size iframe overlay

high

js obfuscation

JavaScript uses eval() with String.fromCharCode — common obfuscation

high

js obfuscation

JavaScript uses Function constructor for runtime code generation

critical

obfuscated code

Large eval()-based obfuscated JavaScript block present in the NETZME payment script section. Uses a custom base-conversion encoder (_0xe57c) followed by a self-executing eval() with heavily encoded string payload. The actual runtime behavior is hidden and cannot be statically determined. (location: page.html:line 169 (NETZME script block))

high

malicious redirect

A JavaScript function OpenInNewTab() hardcodes a redirect to 'https://english.gossip-lankanews.com/register' — a domain unrelated to toto12atlanta.net or toto12core.com. This silently sends users to a third-party registration page, potentially for credential harvesting or affiliate fraud. (location: page.html:line 219-222)

high

malicious redirect

The 'Lupa Password' (Forgot Password) link is dynamically rewritten via jQuery to redirect to 'https://kitakale.me/TELEGRAMTOTO12' instead of the site's own /forgot/password page. Users seeking account recovery are silently diverted to an external Telegram link — a social engineering vector for credential theft. (location: page.html:line 2021 / page-text.txt:line 1702)

high

credential harvesting

The QRIS deposit flow injects a hidden iframe loading content from 'https://olx.recamweek.com/TOTO12/Hk4REua.png' and immediately posts the logged-in username via postMessage with wildcard origin ('*'): contentWindow.postMessage('{"username":"..."}', '*'). This exfiltrates the current session username to a third-party domain with no origin restriction. (location: page.html:lines 1775-1779)

high

hidden content

An external script is loaded from 'https://olx.recamweek.com/snackbarmobile.js' — a third-party domain (recamweek.com) not affiliated with the site. The script's content is unknown and executes in the page context with full DOM access. Combined with the iframe from the same domain, this represents a persistent third-party code injection point. (location: page.html:line 1675)

medium

social engineering

The site uses a fake animated progressive jackpot counter (IDR 1,131,665,972+) that auto-increments every 100ms via setInterval to simulate a growing prize pool. This is a fabricated urgency/reward manipulation technique designed to pressure users into depositing funds into an illegal gambling platform. (location: page.html:lines 1552-1566)

medium

hidden content

Developer tools are actively blocked: Ctrl+Shift+I, Ctrl+U, F12, and right-click context menu are all suppressed via event listeners. This anti-inspection behavior is used to conceal obfuscated scripts and malicious code from security researchers and users. (location: page.html:lines 92-108 and 1727-1743)

medium

malicious redirect

The canonical URL points to 'https://toto12core.com' while the page is served from toto12atlanta.net. The amphtml link points to 'https://pizzasunday.info/linkutama/' — an unrelated domain used as an AMP alternate, potentially for SEO manipulation or redirect chaining to alternate gambling mirror sites. (location: page.html:lines 4 and 12)

medium

social engineering

The site presents a feedback/survey form via a popup window pointing to 'https://form.6mbr.com/?webname=english.gossip-lankanews.com&lang=id'. The webname parameter references gossip-lankanews.com (a different site), indicating the feedback infrastructure is shared across multiple gambling/spam sites and may harvest user data beyond what is disclosed. (location: page.html:lines 310-313)

low

prompt injection

Multiple Google Site Verification meta tags (15 entries) are present for a single domain. This is abnormal and suggests the domain may be used for SEO manipulation, potentially to boost search ranking for gambling keywords and make the site appear more legitimate to automated crawlers and AI-based content classifiers. (location: page.html:lines 76-90)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/toto12atlanta.net

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is toto12atlanta.net safe for AI agents to use?

toto12atlanta.net currently scores 35/100 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.