Is txxx.com safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
43/100

context safety score

A score of 43/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
100
behavior
100
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 Function constructor for runtime code generation

high

obfuscated code

The ad configuration script explicitly references 'adver':'7.10.13.hommy.obfuscated.js' and loads a dynamically constructed obfuscated script: 'https://js.txxx.tube/flytrain/exort7.10.13.415a150d8ca331c798f49c864e02c543.js'. The filename contains a hash and is consistent with obfuscated payload delivery for ad/tracking purposes. (location: page.html:58-60)

high

malicious redirect

Geo-targeted forced redirects (window.force_url) are set for users in Ukraine ('ua'), South Korea ('kr'), and France ('fr') country codes, directing them to opaque tracking URLs at 'directsle.com' with long encrypted/encoded parameters. These redirects are injected into the popunder system and fire without user consent. (location: page.html:127-139)

medium

malicious redirect

Push notification subscription interstitial uses 'subInterstitialSettings.directLink' pointing to 'https://online-hd.amazingcontent.site/?tag_id=93577&cl=3&click=1' β€” an unrelated third-party domain with suspicious naming used as a direct redirect when users interact with push prompts. (location: page.html:62)

high

social engineering

A timed content-locking button labeled 'UNLOCK FULL' (and temporarily overridden to 'AI Porn Video' until 2026-03-21) is programmatically injected over video content. Users are socially engineered into clicking to 'unlock' content, which redirects them to affiliate/adult subscription sites (cmonbae.com, g2fame.com, javhd.com, kink.com, etc.). (location: page.html:77-101)

medium

social engineering

Tab-link advertisements use deceptive labels mimicking popular platforms: '🩷TikTok Porn' (linking to as.fontheader.com) and 'πŸ”₯β„–1 PORN GENERATOR' / 'πŸ”₯AI porn' (linking to nudeai.fun and candyai.gg). These brand-adjacent titles are designed to lure clicks under false pretenses. (location: page.html:157-213)

medium

brand impersonation

Tab-link labeled '🩷TikTok Porn' exploits the TikTok brand name to drive traffic to 'https://as.fontheader.com/as/nl?p=tubecorporate&v=10662', which is unaffiliated with TikTok. This constitutes brand impersonation to increase click-through rates. (location: page.html:197-201)

medium

hidden content

Yandex Metrika tracking pixels are placed at position 'left:-9999px' (off-screen) in noscript tags, silently tracking users even without JavaScript. Additionally, multiple invisible tracking pixels are dynamically appended to the document body, operating outside the user's visible page area. (location: page.html:37-39)

medium

hidden content

A large base64-encoded SVG icon is embedded inside a JavaScript comment within window._hl configuration. While currently commented out, it represents hidden/encoded content that could be activated. The encoded blob is non-trivially long and obscures what graphic is being used in the ad button. (location: page.html:159)

high

malicious redirect

Popunder/tabunder ad system with 'popunder_type: tabunder' and frequency set to 999999 is configured to open new browser tabs redirecting to third-party ad networks (ExoClick zone 765037, bartcons.com, pemsrv.com) triggered by any click on video player elements or listing items β€” aggressive and deceptive redirect mechanism. (location: page.html:493-552)

medium

social engineering

The 'delegate-ch' meta tag delegates full client-hint headers (UA string, platform, architecture, model, bitness, full version list) to 'tsyndicate.com', a third-party ad syndication domain. This silently harvests detailed browser fingerprinting data on behalf of an external party without clear user disclosure. (location: page.html:45)

low

hidden content

The adver configuration variable 'chAm2MphS9' uses a randomly generated-looking key name and contains encoded RTB controller path ('txxx/txxCtrl.js?v=4.3') and a VAST ad server URL, making the ad infrastructure difficult to audit or block. Variable obfuscation via random naming is a known evasion technique. (location: page.html:57-58)

API

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

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is txxx.com safe for AI agents to use?

txxx.com currently scores 43/100 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 β€” one GET request is all it takes. query the api, browse the registry, or download the full dataset.