Is opaitu.com Suspicious? 30/100 Trust Score

Exercise caution when interacting with this website.

Detailed Analysis Report: Is opaitu.com Safe and Legit? Website Overview and Purpose opaitu.com was analyzed as a unknown website with General characteristics. This assessment combines automated technical checks, threat-intelligence signals, and scraped on-page content to estimate practical user risk. The current result is warning with a trust score of 50/100 . 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: warning with score 50/100 in unknown (General). Technical evidence reviewed includes DNS, SSL, WHOIS/RDAP/CT age evidence, WebRisk, VirusTotal, and a live scrape of approximately 0 characters. Supplementary coverage included 0 additional internal page(s), improving visibility into contact/legal signals when available. Observed transparency posture: contact signals are limited , policy signals are limited . Additional analysis signals included: The domain is only 902 days old, indicating it is relatively new and potentially less trustworthy. | The site has 2 detections on VirusTotal, which raises concerns about its safety and potential malicious activity. | There is no contact information, privacy policy, or terms of service available on the site, indicating a lack of transparency.. Claims Verification and Red Flags Red Flags Detected The scan identified concrete risk indicators that should be reviewed before trusting this domain. Finding: VirusTotal flagged the site as malicious with 2 detections. Finding: Missing contact information and legal pages raise concerns about accountability. Caution Points Verify that branding, ownership details, and support channels match an official source before sharing sensitive information. Policy pages were not clearly detected in this scan; request transparent legal terms before transacting. 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: E7 ), VirusTotal reports 2/95 detections, WebRisk status is CLEAN , SPF is configured , and DMARC is missing . Legitimacy and Reputation Assessment Domain age evidence indicates 2 year(s) based on whois_or_cache . Reputation telemetry shows no meaningful Tranco ranking , which should be interpreted alongside business context rather than in isolation. Threat-intelligence checks currently show 2 malicious engine detection(s), 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: Overall risk remains in warning territory, so users should require additional proof before trusting critical interactions. Exercise caution and verify claims independently before engaging with the site.

• [SECURITY] VirusTotal reports 2 malicious engine detection(s)
• [EVIDENCE] Supplementary internal pages were not captured, so transparency evidence is limited in this run
• [REPUTATION] No measurable Tranco ranking despite non-new domain age, limiting independent trust signals
• [SECURITY] Email-authentication posture is incomplete (SPF: configured, DMARC: missing)
• [SECURITY] VirusTotal flagged the site as malicious with 2 detections.

• [DOMAIN AGE] The domain is only 902 days old, indicating it is relatively new and potentially less trustworthy.
• [SECURITY] The site has 2 detections on VirusTotal, which raises concerns about its safety and potential malicious activity.
• [TRANSPARENCY] There is no contact information, privacy policy, or terms of service available on the site, indicating a lack of transparency.
• [REPUTATION] The site is not ranked in the Tranco Global list, suggesting it lacks visibility and recognition.
• [SPF RECORD] The presence of an SPF record is noted, but the absence of a DMARC record indicates potential vulnerabilities in email security.

• {"type":"evidence","reason":"Evidence coverage extremely low (0%)","scoreCeiling":30,"targetStatus":"warning"}
• {"type":"status_score_alignment","reason":"Status \"warning\" requires score = 40 (was 30)","scoreCeiling":null,"targetStatus":"scam"}