Is xn----ztbcbceder.net 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
62
behavior
100
content
30
graph
30

7 threat patterns detected

medium

domain spoof risk

domain has spoofing indicators (punycode/confusable/highly synthetic naming)

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

high

malicious redirect

The site explicitly functions as a mirror/redirect page. The domain xn----ztbcbceder.net (punycode) redirects users to xn----ztbcbceder.tv via multiple inline links. The page text states 'Зеркало rus porno перенаправит тебя на нужный ресурс' (mirror will redirect you to the needed resource). All content links point to xn----ztbcbceder.tv, a different domain. This mirror-redirect pattern is commonly used to bypass blocks and funnel traffic to uncontrolled third-party domains. (location: page.html:55-56, meta description tag line 13)

medium

hidden content

External JavaScript loaded from opaque relative paths './images/1755', './images/2qt4iarl6.js', './images/awt.min.js', and './images/rating.min.js'. The path './images/1755' has no file extension, is numerically named, and is loaded as a script — highly unusual and indicative of obfuscated or dynamically-served JavaScript that could contain tracking, drive-by exploits, or redirects not visible in static HTML. (location: page.html:16, 21, 125, 126)

medium

obfuscated code

Thumbnail animation callbacks in onmouseover handlers pass Base64-encoded strings to start_animate(). For example: 'aHR0cHM6Ly94bi0tLS16dGJjYmNlZGVyLnR2L...' These strings decode to URLs on xn----ztbcbceder.tv. While the decoded values appear to be image URLs, using Base64 encoding to obscure URL parameters in event handlers is an obfuscation technique that evades static URL scanners and can mask malicious payloads. (location: page.html:64, 69, 74, 79, 84, 89, 94, 99, 104, 109)

medium

brand impersonation

The site impersonates a well-known Russian adult platform ('рус порно' / rus porno) by presenting itself as an official mirror. The metadata description reads 'Зеркало rus porno перенаправит тебя на нужный ресурс' (Mirror rus porno will redirect you to the needed resource), falsely implying official affiliation. The domain uses a punycode IDN (xn----ztbcbceder.net) to visually approximate the brand in Cyrillic contexts, a classic brand impersonation technique. (location: page.html:12-13, page-text.txt:94)

medium

social engineering

The page uses the pretext of government censorship (Роскомнадзор blocking) as a social engineering trigger to justify the redirect to an external domain: 'Как только Роскомнадзор заблокировал всем известный сайт, мы незамедлительно переехали на рус-порно.tv'. This appeal to authority and urgency is a social engineering technique designed to lower user suspicion about following an off-domain redirect. (location: page-text.txt:29, page.html:55)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/xn----ztbcbceder.net

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is xn----ztbcbceder.net safe for AI agents to use?

xn----ztbcbceder.net 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.