Is xvideosbr.blog safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
40/100

context safety score

A score of 40/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
100
behavior
80
content
0
graph
30

6 threat patterns detected

high

phishing

1 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host

high

cloaking

Page conditionally redirects based on referrer or user-agent

high

brand impersonation

Site operates as 'xvideosbr.blog' impersonating the well-known adult brand 'Xvideos.com' (xvideos.com). The page title, logo, OG tags, and body copy explicitly reference 'Xvideos.com' as if this site is that brand, while running on a completely different domain. Internal links also reference competitor brands (PornHub, RedTube, Xhamster, Brazzers, Spankbang, Chaturbate, Cam4) as category labels, trading on those brand names to attract search traffic. (location: page.html:1 - <title>, og:site_name, og:title, body text referencing 'Xvideos.com')

high

malicious redirect

JavaScript back-button hijacking code intercepts the browser popstate event and forcibly redirects the user to a random URL from a large hardcoded list of internal category pages when the user attempts to navigate back. This manipulates browser history with two pushState calls to trap the user on the site and prevent normal back-navigation, a classic dark-pattern redirect abuse. (location: page.html:536-550 (inline script); page-text.txt:532-545)

medium

hidden content

A third-party ad/pop script is loaded asynchronously from an external domain 'xtraffix.com' (https://xtraffix.com/ads/pop.php?c=808&ver=01). This is a known pop-under/pop-up ad network that can serve unsolicited redirects, malvertising, or forced navigation to unrelated or harmful sites without user interaction. (location: page.html:6 - <script async src="https://xtraffix.com/ads/pop.php?c=808&ver=01">)

low

hidden content

A hidden 1x1 tracking pixel from histats.com is embedded with display:none styling, performing covert user tracking without visible disclosure to the user. (location: page.html:6 - <img src="//sstatic1.histats.com/0.gif?4919831&101" style="display:none">)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/xvideosbr.blog

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is xvideosbr.blog safe for AI agents to use?

xvideosbr.blog currently scores 40/100 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.