Is trx-aml-check.vercel.app a scam? TrustSniffer's high-risk assessment: 0/100

Security Alert

Fortinet, Kaspersky, Sophos flagged this site in external intelligence checks, indicating elevated compromise/scam exposure that requires immediate caution.

This website presents itself as "TRX AML Check", a service that claims to be the "#1" anti-money-laundering verification tool for the TRON network. Its page title advertises screening of USDT on TRC20 and compliance checks for TRX wallets. It is a single-page, text-heavy web application hosted on a free subdomain of a general-purpose application-hosting platform rather than on a dedicated branded domain. Its apparent business model is to invite visitors to submit wallet addresses for risk screening.

Scam/Impersonation Risk

Contradictory signals are present and decisive. Multiple major security vendors currently flag the site as malicious, and a confirmed external blacklist entry exists. Reputation-based protections have therefore been triggered, and they override every positive technical signal. The site's own claims aggravate this. A "#1" ranking for TRON AML verification is an unverifiable superlative, and the compliance-service framing is the kind of pretext commonly used to prompt wallet-address and transaction-data submission. Its domain also closely resembles the generic hosting platform's own domain, so it gives the visitor no independent brand anchor. In sandbox testing, the homepage made a notable volume of outbound requests to third-party destinations, including data submissions (POST requests) to destinations outside the recognised-service list. This is a concern for any page that invites sensitive wallet-related input. The same testing found no wallet-drainer behaviour, clipboard manipulation, hidden forms or cloaking, which narrows the observed concern to reputation and outbound data flow. A separate set of abuse reports applies to a shared platform IP address rather than to this site, and it has been discounted as shared-infrastructure noise. It does not add to the risk assessment. Evidence:

• Homepage: the title promotes "#1 TRON Network AML Verification | USDT TRC20, TRX Wallet Compliance", a ranking claim with no supporting source.
• Reputation checks: multiple leading security vendors classify the site as malicious, and the external blacklist hit is confirmed.
• Homepage behaviour in the sandbox: a high share of traffic went to external destinations, with several submissions to non-recognised third parties; no wallet-drainer, clipboard or hidden-form activity was detected.
• Abuse reports tied to a shared platform IP address were reviewed and discounted as shared-infrastructure noise.

Regulatory Verification Notes

The evidence does not connect the site to any identifiable operating company, regulator or licensed compliance provider. Nothing on the captured homepage substantiates its AML-compliance positioning. An "AML check" brand with no demonstrable regulatory standing, combined with the adverse reputation findings, is a material concern. No third-party broker reputation record exists for the site, so this assessment rests on the technical and threat-intelligence findings alone. The site's transport encryption is valid but is only a basic domain-validated certificate. It confirms an encrypted connection and says nothing about who operates the site. Evidence:

• Homepage: no operator name, registration number or regulatory authorisation could be established from the captured content.
• Served from AS16509 (AMAZON-02 - Amazon.com, Inc., US).
• TLS certificate issued by WR1 (DV, domain-validated only), valid to 2026-11-27.
• Third-party broker database: no matching record.

What to Verify Next

Any prospective interaction should begin with independent confirmation that a real, registered entity operates this service. That means searching the relevant financial-crime or virtual-asset service-provider registers for the claimed brand. It also means checking whether established blockchain-analytics providers or the official TRON ecosystem channels recognise this tool. Official support and contact channels should be confirmed through an independent route rather than through links on the site. Wallet addresses, keys or account details should not be submitted until the site's threat listings are cleared. Evidence:

• Homepage: the compliance claims should be tested against official registers, since no on-site credential supports them.
• Reputation findings: re-check the site's standing with the flagging vendors before any engagement.
• Homepage behaviour: the sandbox observed data submissions to non-recognised third parties.

Summary Verdict

The overall posture is high risk. Confirmed adverse reputation findings from multiple independent sources outweigh the benign technical characteristics, and the unverified compliance-service positioning offers no counterweight. The site cannot be treated as trustworthy for any sensitive purpose.

Infrastructure Integrity

The site runs on Amazon-operated network infrastructure in the United States behind a content-delivery layer, and all observed addresses are edge nodes. The origin server was not observable, which limits independent hosting verification and can mask rapid content changes. The edge layer is a mitigating factor only. It does not offset the reputation findings.

Closing Assessment

At most, the site should be viewed read-only. No login, credential entry, wallet connection, address submission or financial transaction should take place. Organisations should consider blocking the domain pending independent clearance.

Signals weighed against the site

• AbuseIPDB: 84 reports on hosting IP 64.29.17.3 (Vercel, Inc, Content Delivery Network), 0% confidence. The reports are attributed to shared infrastructure, not specifically to this website.