Is link.skz.by/nAEf9Y Risky? 40/100 Trust Score

Exercise caution when interacting with this website.

Detailed Analysis Report: Is link.skz.by/nAEf9Y Safe and Legit? Website Overview and Purpose link.skz.by/nAEf9Y was analyzed as a Financial Services website with Authentication characteristics. This assessment combines automated technical checks, threat-intelligence signals, and scraped on-page content to estimate practical user risk. The current result is phishing with a trust score of 10/100 . This should be treated as an evidence-driven safety snapshot, not a legal certification, and confidence depends on how complete the available signals are for ownership, transparency, and security controls. Content Quality and User Experience Key Experience Highlights Primary classification from this run: phishing with score 10/100 in Financial Services (Authentication). Technical evidence reviewed includes DNS, SSL, WHOIS/RDAP/CT age evidence, WebRisk, VirusTotal, and a live scrape of approximately 389 characters. Supplementary coverage included 1 additional internal page(s), improving visibility into contact/legal signals when available. Observed transparency posture: contact signals are limited , policy signals are present . Additional analysis signals included: The domain is 2916 days old, which is relatively established but does not guarantee legitimacy. | The SSL certificate is valid, indicating some level of security in data transmission. | The absence of SPF records raises concerns about email spoofing and phishing risks.. Claims Verification and Red Flags Red Flags Detected The scan identified concrete risk indicators that should be reviewed before trusting this domain. Finding: The site appears to be a phishing attempt, as it requests sensitive personal information without clear legitimacy. Finding: There is no contact information available, which is a red flag for trustworthiness. Finding: No brand claim or evidence of legitimacy is present, raising suspicion about the site s purpose. Finding: While terms and privacy policies exist, they do not provide sufficient assurance of legitimacy. Caution Points Verify that branding, ownership details, and support channels match an official source before sharing sensitive information. Read the available policy/terms pages carefully for refund, dispute, and liability terms. Contact transparency appears limited; avoid high-risk actions until accountable support channels are confirmed. Prefer low-risk interaction first and escalate trust only after independent verification. Security Note: SSL is valid (issuer: GlobalSign GCC R6 AlphaSSL CA 2025 ), VirusTotal reports 0/unknown detections, WebRisk status is CLEAN , SPF is missing , and DMARC is missing . Legitimacy and Reputation Assessment Domain age evidence indicates 7 year(s) based on whois_fast_path . Reputation telemetry shows Tranco rank #827793 , which should be interpreted alongside business context rather than in isolation. Threat-intelligence checks currently show no direct malicious-engine consensus, and no single signal should be treated as conclusive by itself. Strong legitimacy normally requires alignment across age, contact accountability, policy transparency, and consistent brand identity. Final Verdict and Recommendations Conclusion: Risk indicators are substantial enough to treat this domain as potentially unsafe until proven otherwise. Avoid entering personal information and verify the legitimacy of the site before proceeding.

• [PHISHING] The site appears to be a phishing attempt, as it requests sensitive personal information without clear legitimacy.
• [BRAND CLAIM] No brand claim or evidence of legitimacy is present, raising suspicion about the site's purpose.
• [TERMS AND PRIVACY] While terms and privacy policies exist, they do not provide sufficient assurance of legitimacy.
• [LOGIN SURFACE] The presence of a login surface increases the risk of credential harvesting.

• [DOMAIN AGE] The domain is 2916 days old, which is relatively established but does not guarantee legitimacy.
• [SSL VALIDATION] The SSL certificate is valid, indicating some level of security in data transmission.
• [SPF RECORD] The absence of SPF records raises concerns about email spoofing and phishing risks.
• [DMARC RECORD] The lack of DMARC records further increases the risk of email-based attacks.
• [HIGH RISK PATH] The URL indicates a high-risk path for credential harvesting, as it leads to an authentication page.
• [TRANSPARENCY] Verified contact/legal links and contact details were detected from captured pages.