Is evm-1006.vercel.app a scam? TrustSniffer's high-risk assessment: 0/100

Overview

This is a minimal single-page site served from a subdomain of a public application-hosting platform. Its homepage carries the generic title "Example Page" and only a short block of text. It presents no recognizable brand, product catalogue or stated business model, so its apparent purpose is a placeholder, test deployment or unidentified web application. Behavioral testing recorded stable page loads but also outbound activity to third-party destinations.

Scam/Impersonation Risk

Contradictory signals are present. Multiple independent threat-intelligence sources currently flag the domain as malicious or suspicious, and the site is blacklisted on that basis. This is the decisive factor in the assessment, and the platform's protections and the valid encryption cannot offset it. No brand impersonation, conflicting legal identities or phishing-form behavior were observed on the page itself. The page also showed no wallet-connection prompts, clipboard manipulation, hidden forms or content cloaking, so the specific harm the flags point to is unconfirmed. A large volume of abuse reports is attached to the shared hosting address the site resolves to. Those reports apply to a provider-level address used by many tenants and are discounted. They are not evidence against this site. During interaction testing, a high share of the site's network requests went to external destinations, and some of those were data submissions (POST requests) to unrecognized third-party endpoints. Combined with the blacklist listing, this raises the risk that data entered on the page could leave the site unseen. Evidence:

• Homepage: titled "Example Page" with a short text body and no identifiable brand, operator or offering.
• Reputation checks: several independent threat-intelligence sources report the domain as malicious or suspicious, and an external blacklist flag is set.
• Behavioral sandbox (3 of 3 runs completed): 4 external XHR/fetch calls and 2 POSTs to non-whitelisted destinations, with up to 71.4% of observed activity external and 8 console errors.
• Hosting address: 90 abuse reports are attached to the shared provider IP 64.29.17.67 (Vercel). These are discounted as shared-infrastructure noise.

Regulatory Verification Notes

The homepage discloses no operating company, legal or terms pages, licensing or registration details, or contact channels. The captured content is too thin to support any regulatory or identity assessment, so the real-world operator is unidentified. This is a content gap and not a contradiction. No third-party broker or regulator listing matched the domain, so there is no external regulatory signal in either direction. Ownership opacity is present. Because the site sits on a shared platform subdomain, there is no independent domain-level identity to anchor it to a named entity. Evidence:

• Homepage: roughly 800 characters of text, with no company name, address, license number or legal notice.
• Hosting: served from AS16509 (AMAZON-02, Amazon.com, Inc., US), registry ARIN, on a Vercel-platform subdomain.
• Transport encryption: TLS certificate issued by WR1 at DV (domain-validated) level, valid to 2026-11-27. DV confirms only control of the domain, not the operator's identity.

What to Verify Next

Before any engagement, the site's operator and purpose need independent confirmation. A party that directed the user to this address should be contacted through a separate, trusted channel, such as a known phone number or an official corporate website, to confirm that the address is intentional and legitimate. The user should check whether the claimed organization publishes this address on its own verified properties. Any company or licensing claims must be confirmed directly with the relevant registry, since the site makes none. The threat-intelligence listings should be rechecked later in case the flags are cleared or the site is cleaned. Evidence:

• Homepage: no stated operator, so identity can only be established outside the site.
• Reputation listings: current at the time of analysis and subject to change if the owner remediates.
• Outbound requests: external POST destinations were observed and were not recognized as established service providers.

Summary Verdict

The overall posture is high risk. Active malicious and suspicious detections by independent sources outweigh the technically well-formed delivery of the page. The operator remains unidentified, and the site offers no content that would support legitimacy. It is therefore treated as unsuitable for sensitive interactions.

Infrastructure Integrity

The site is delivered through an established, trusted edge provider on Amazon-hosted address space, and the transport certificate is valid. All observed addresses are edge servers, and the origin server was not observable. This is a mitigating factor only: it limits direct exposure of the backend but does not establish the operator's legitimacy. Edge-only visibility also prevents independent verification of the hosting and can mask rapid content swaps. It does not offset the external threat detections.

Closing Assessment

The site should be limited to read-only viewing at most. No login, credential entry, personal data submission, payment or wallet connection should occur on it unless the operator is independently confirmed and the reputation flags are cleared.

Signals weighed against the site

• AbuseIPDB: 90 reports on hosting IP 64.29.17.67 (Vercel, Inc, Content Delivery Network), 0% confidence. The reports are attributed to shared infrastructure, not specifically to this website.