Is cum.net safe?
http://cum.net/
Checked on
How we checked
Coverage: strong · 5 of 6 applicable core capabilities
- Antivirus (58 of 93 engines answered): completed
- Google Safe Browsing: completed
- page reading · limited: did not fully complete
- page capture · not available: did not fully complete
- domain records: completed
- web research: completed
Long-registered domain served over plain HTTP, with one isolated antivirus flag and no confirmed scam mechanism
cum.net is a domain registered in February 1998, and the browser threat feed shows no warning for it. A single antivirus engine out of 93 flagged it, with no agreement from the others. The scanned address was served over plain HTTP, and the page text was not read in full, so the site's contact details were not reviewed. We found no evidence of fraud, but the unencrypted connection, the lone detection and the unclear operator keep the score in the Moderate Risk range.
Where this site sits
- Dangerous1–20
- High Risk21–44
- Moderate Risk45–69
- Low Risk70–84
- Safe85–100
The score combines saved evidence strength and analysis quality. Coverage is reported separately.
Why 66/100
Moderate Risk covers scores 45–69. 1 finding pulled the score down; 2 pushed it up.
What pulled the score down
- Moderate1 independent antivirus family reported an adverse result.
What pushed the score up
- SupportsThe domain was registered in 1998.
- SupportsThe browser threat feed returned no threat warning.
No points per finding are stored for this report: our analysis weighed all findings together to set the score. Each finding shows its saved severity instead (Decisive, Strong, Moderate or Minor). Community reviews never change the Safety Score.
01 · Investigation Brief
Investigation Brief
cum.net is a domain registered in February 1998, and the browser threat feed shows no warning for it. A single antivirus engine out of 93 flagged it, with no agreement from the others. The scanned address was served over plain HTTP, and the page text was not read in full, so the site's contact details were not reviewed. We found no evidence of fraud, but the unencrypted connection, the lone detection and the unclear operator keep the score in the Moderate Risk range.
What the checks found
One antivirus vendor, Yandex Safebrowsing, reported an adverse result for this domain. That is a single isolated detection across 93 engines, with no wider vendor agreement.
The browser threat feed returned no threat warning. Registration records show the domain was created on 1998-02-26, which means it has a very long history.
Connection security versus operator risk
The saved connection check could not validate a secure connection, and the address was served over plain HTTP. A third-party review site also notes that HTTPS was not found. Anything a visitor sends to this site can therefore travel unencrypted.
The page text was not read in full, so the site's contact details were not reviewed. Who runs the site remains unverified. No sales funnel, payment flow or download trap was observed.
Why the score is 66
1 independent antivirus family reported an adverse result. Coverage remains separate so missing sources cannot be mistaken for clean results.
02 · Security Evidence
Security evidence
Antivirus Engines
1/ 93
detectionsFresh result
1 engine flagged this URL
Every saved adverse engine is listed below. The full provider matrix remains available for audit.
- Malicious
- 1
- Suspicious
- 0
- Total
- 93
| Engine | Finding |
|---|---|
| Yandex SafebrowsingMalicious | phishing |
All 93 engine results
- Yandex Safebrowsing - phishing - Malicious
- 0xSI_f33d - Unrated
- Abusix - Clean
- Acronis - Clean
- ADMINUSLabs - Clean
- AILabs (MONITORAPP) - Clean
- AlienVault - Clean
- alphaMountain.ai - Unrated
- AlphaSOC - Unrated
- Antiy-AVL - Clean
- ArcSight Threat Intelligence - Unrated
- AutoShun - Unrated
- Bfore.Ai PreCrime - Unrated
- BitDefender - Clean
- Bkav - Unrated
- BlockList - Clean
- Blueliv - Clean
- Certego - Clean
- ChainPatrol - Unrated
- Chong Lua Dao - Clean
- CINS Army - Clean
- CRDF - Clean
- Criminal IP - Unrated
- CSIS Security Group - Unrated
- CTX AI - Clean
- Cyan - Unrated
- Cyble - Clean
- CyRadar - Clean
- desenmascara.me - Clean
- DNS8 - Unrated
- Dr.Web - Clean
- EmergingThreats - Clean
- Emsisoft - Clean
- Ermes - Unrated
- ESET - Clean
- ESTsecurity - Clean
- Forcepoint ThreatSeeker - Clean
- Fortinet - Clean
- Fortra - Unrated
- G-Data - Clean
- GCP Abuse Intelligence - Unrated
- Google Safe Browsing - Clean
- GreenSnow - Clean
- GreyNoise - Unrated
- Gridinsoft - Unrated
- Guardpot - Unrated
- Heimdal Security - Clean
- Hunt.io Intelligence - Unrated
- IPsum - Clean
- Juniper Networks - Clean
- K7AntiVirus - Unrated
- Kaspersky - Clean
- LevelBlue - Clean
- Lionic - Clean
- Lumu - Unrated
- Malwared - Clean
- MalwarePatrol - Clean
- MalwareURL - Unrated
- Mimecast - Unrated
- Netcraft - Unrated
- OpenPhish - Clean
- Orcapot - Unrated
- PhishFort - Unrated
- Phishing Database - Clean
- Phishtank - Clean
- PREBYTES - Clean
- PrecisionSec - Unrated
- Quick Heal - Clean
- Quttera - Clean
- Rising - Clean
- SafeToOpen - Unrated
- Sangfor - Clean
- Sansec eComscan - Unrated
- Scantitan - Clean
- SCUMWARE.org - Clean
- Seclookup - Clean
- Snort IP sample list - Unrated
- SOCRadar - Unrated
- Sophos - Clean
- StopForumSpam - Clean
- Sucuri SiteCheck - Clean
- Synthient - Unrated
- ThreatHive - Clean
- URLhaus - Clean
- URLQuery - Unrated
- Viettel Threat Intelligence - Clean
- VIPRE - Unrated
- ViriBack - Clean
- VX Vault - Clean
- Webroot - Clean
- Xcitium Verdict Cloud - Clean
- ZeroCERT - Clean
- ZeroFox - Unrated
How security vendors categorise this site
- BitDefenderporn
- Forcepoint ThreatSeekersex
Each vendor’s own label for the site, saved with the antivirus result. Labels are separate from the engine verdicts above and can disagree with each other.
Security Scans
Checked against the browser threat feeds available to this scan — no hit.
03 · Investigation Story
Investigation story
What the site claims
The captured page appears to offer a content service.
What we observed
The page content was captured and checked alongside 58 antivirus results.
What independent research found
2 external findings were saved and compared with the page evidence.
What remains unverified
1 of the 6 applicable core capabilities did not complete, so those gaps remain visible in the coverage ledger.
What kind of site and risk is this?
Threat category
No threat category confirmed
Service and business model
Content
Observed behavior
Evidence behind this classification
- 01One antivirus engine out of 93 flagged the domain, with no consensus among the others.
- 02The site was served over plain HTTP without a validated secure connection.
- 03The domain was registered in 1998.
Web research findings
Independent findings for cum.net, including public complaints, named review sources, registration records, and look-alike-domain evidence. A missing result is shown as unverified, never converted into a clean bill of health.
- WooWhoisopen
"Creation Date: | 1998-02-26"
Reputation Sources
How this domain rates across independent threat-intelligence and blocklist providers.
04 · Domain & Infrastructure
Domain & infrastructure
The plumbing behind the site — who registered it, how it’s encrypted, where it’s hosted, and where it links out. A valid certificate or a calm server doesn’t mean the business is honest — scam sites pass these checks too. Use this to corroborate the verdict, not to overturn it.
Infrastructure map
How the saved page connected to the wider web.
- Domaincum.net
- Redirects tocum.net
- Hosted byAmazon Technologies Inc.
Domain Timeline
- Feb 26, 1998Domain registered
First appeared in WHOIS records — 28 years old when this review was saved.
- Oct 27, 2026Saved security review — Rated Moderate Risk
The evidence in this saved scan is mixed or incomplete; the completed checks are detailed above.
Contact Verification
Saved contact details can help identify the operator. Their presence supports traceability; it does not prove the business is trustworthy.
Domain & Encryption
A shared content-delivery network address answers for many sites, so it is not the site's own server and says nothing about who runs it.
Payment providers the page loads
None seen among the outside domains we saved.
Read from the first 20 outside domains the page loads and the shop platform it uses; the web server and platform rows are under Hosting & Technology. A payment script on the page does not prove the shop accepts that method at checkout, or that you are protected.
Server Reputation
05 · Evidence Ledger
Evidence ledger
- Antiviruscomplete
- Browser threat feedcomplete
- Page contentpartial
- Analysiscomplete
- Visual evidenceunavailable
The conclusion is supported by the evidence saved with this report.
Technical threat
suspiciousMalware, phishing, credential theft and hostile infrastructure.
1 independent antivirus family reported an adverse result.
Operator / customer risk
unknownComplaints, withdrawals, business conduct and commercial traps.
No confirmed evidence in this dimension.
Source coverage and freshness
Status shows whether usable evidence was saved; finding shows what that evidence observed.
| Source | Result | Completion | Finding | Freshness |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Antivirus | 1 of 93 engines flagged | Completed | Adverse | fresh · analysed Oct 27, 2026 |
| Browser protection | No browser threat-list match | Completed | No adverse finding | this scan · Oct 27, 2026 |
| Page content | Page fetched · HTTP 200 | Limited | No saved finding | this scan · Oct 27, 2026 |
| Visual evidence | The saved page capture was not reliable enough to use | Unavailable | No saved finding | Not available |
| Independent research | 2 independent findings were saved | Completed | No adverse finding | this scan · Oct 27, 2026 |
- Antivirus
- Result1 of 93 engines flagged
- CompletionCompletedFindingAdverse
- Freshnessfresh · analysed Oct 27, 2026
- Browser protection
- ResultNo browser threat-list match
- CompletionCompletedFindingNo adverse finding
- Freshnessthis scan · Oct 27, 2026
- Page content
- ResultPage fetched · HTTP 200
- CompletionLimitedFindingNo saved finding
- Freshnessthis scan · Oct 27, 2026
- Visual evidence
- ResultThe saved page capture was not reliable enough to use
- CompletionUnavailableFindingNo saved finding
- FreshnessNot available
- Independent research
- Result2 independent findings were saved
- CompletionCompletedFindingNo adverse finding
- Freshnessthis scan · Oct 27, 2026
07 · Safety FAQ
Safety FAQ
Common questions, answered directly from the scan data above — so the answers reflect the saved verdict and evidence in this report.
Is cum.net a scam or is it safe?
Is cum.net safe to use?
Has cum.net been flagged by antivirus engines?
Is cum.net on any phishing or malware blacklists?
How old is the cum.net domain?
Does cum.net have a valid SSL certificate?
Where is cum.net hosted?
How often is the cum.net report updated?
08 · Final Verdict
Final verdict
Long-registered domain served over plain HTTP, with one isolated antivirus flag and no confirmed scam mechanism
The written conclusion remains part of the saved report.
cum.net is a domain registered in February 1998, and the browser threat feed shows no warning for it. A single antivirus engine out of 93 flagged it, with no agreement from the others. The scanned address was served over plain HTTP, and the page text was not read in full, so the site's contact details were not reviewed. We found no evidence of fraud, but the unencrypted connection, the lone detection and the unclear operator keep the score in the Moderate Risk range.
09 · Community
Community
Are you the owner of cum.net?Verify and reply