Verdict
This assessment found strong scam indicators. Do not pay, sign in, or share personal details with this site.
vote-polls954.pages.dev shows high-risk / scam indicators.
| What this site appears to be | A voting interface for token listings on an exchange platform that explains community voting mechanics, rewards (XP), and requires a connected wallet to cast votes. Contains token profile placeholders and real-time vote tallies. |
|---|
Evidence status and limitations
Evidence completeness: Not recorded
- The real-world operator identity was not independently verified.
- Module-level completeness metadata is unavailable for this legacy report.
At a glance
The checks that decide most of this verdict.
| Malware engines | 3 flagged itVirusTotal | Risk |
|---|---|---|
| Google Safe Browsing | Listed as unsafeGoogle | Risk |
| Abuse reports on the host | 0% confidenceAbuseIPDB, 0 reports; shared hosting inflates reports | Clear |
| Domain age | Not availableNo registration record was returned | Noted |
The page as captured
Key findings
- Automated classification: Sensitive Interaction Risk.
- At least one reputation service TrustSniffer consulted had flagged this domain at assessment time.
- The operator behind the site could not be independently connected to a real-world brand or person.
Full analysis
Security Alert
Google flagged this site in external intelligence checks, indicating elevated compromise/scam exposure that requires immediate caution.
This website is a single-page "vote on token listings" interface that carries an OKX-branded page title and navigation. It invites visitors to paste a token contract address, vote YES or NO on whether the token should be listed, and earn "XP" and "Kiwi" tokens for perks. It is served from a generic developer-hosting subdomain rather than from a recognisable exchange domain. The apparent purpose is to funnel crypto users into wallet-connected voting. Value would be extracted through the wider exchange or token ecosystem rather than through the page itself.
Scam/Impersonation Risk
Hard contradictions are present. The domain is blacklisted by several independent threat-intelligence sources. A leading browser-security service flags it for social engineering, and multiple scanning engines independently classify it as malicious. An external blacklist corroborates both. Brand-lookalike analysis also flags the page for presenting a well-known exchange's name and navigation structure (Deposit, Markets, Trade, Grow, Institutional, Log in, Sign up) on an unrelated, freely provisioned hosting subdomain. The page has no independently verifiable link to the brand it displays, so the branding cannot be treated as evidence of affiliation. The page's own claims are unverifiable. It shows 128 "active tokens (+7 today)", 48,620 community votes, a 78% average YES share, and 34 votes per minute with an "Updating now" label. Its token-profile panel is populated only by placeholders (price, liquidity and volume as dashes, "Contract: 0x...", "Loading..."), yet it shows 319 YES against 134 NO votes and a "69% minimum required" threshold. These look like static or fabricated engagement metrics designed to create urgency and social proof. The reward mechanic is the key risk lever. Each YES vote is said to "earn tokens" for "exclusive perks", and a connected wallet is mandatory. That is a classic pattern for luring users into wallet-connection and signature prompts. Sandbox runs did not observe credential forms, hidden forms, clipboard hijacking or wallet-drainer behaviour. That is a limited mitigating observation, and it cannot offset the confirmed threat listings. No impersonation of a specific legal entity or conflicting legal identities were identified. Evidence:
- Homepage: page title and navigation present the OKX brand, while the site is hosted on an unrelated generic subdomain.
- Homepage: engagement counters (128 active tokens, 48,620 votes, 78% average YES, 34 votes per minute) sit beside empty token-profile placeholders.
- Homepage: voting requires a connected wallet, and YES votes are promised token rewards.
- Reputation layer: several independent sources flag the domain, including a social-engineering classification.
Regulatory Verification Notes
The footer links to About us, Candidate Privacy Notice, Careers and Contact us. No operating company name, registered address, licence, or regulatory registration is stated on the observed page. The page promises a path to a "Kiwi listing" and an "internal review queue" for tokens without naming any responsible entity. No third-party broker reputation record exists for this site, so there is no external regulatory signal to weigh. Ownership and governance accountability remain opaque. This is an administrative gap that compounds the confirmed threat listings. It is not an additional accusation in itself. Evidence:
- Homepage footer: contact and corporate links are present, but no legal entity or licence is disclosed.
- Homepage: the listing and "review queue" process is described without any accountable operator.
- Transport encryption: a domain-validated TLS certificate issued by YE1, valid to 2026-12-18. This confirms encrypted transport only and says nothing about the operator.
- Hosting: served from AS13335.
What to Verify Next
Anyone who reached this page through a link, message or advertisement should treat that link as untrusted. They should open the exchange's official site by typing its address directly or using a saved bookmark, and check whether a token-voting feature exists there. Any voting or reward programme should be confirmed through the platform's own announcements and help centre, not through this page. Any wallet that interacted with the page should be reviewed for unexpected connections or token approvals. Approvals can be revoked with a reputable approval-management tool, and funds moved if anything unfamiliar appears. Support channels should be confirmed independently through the official platform. Evidence:
- Homepage: the voting and reward mechanics have no verifiable source on the page itself.
- Homepage: wallet connection is required before any vote can be cast.
- Reputation layer: the confirmed listings make this site an unsuitable route to the genuine platform.
Summary Verdict
The overall posture is high-risk. Multiple independent reputation sources have confirmed this site as dangerous, and the evidence points to social-engineering intent. Its branded presentation, unverifiable activity statistics and reward-driven wallet funnel are consistent with that finding. The limited benign behavioural observations are insufficient to support any trust classification.
Infrastructure Integrity
The site is fronted by a major CDN and WAF provider (Cloudflare, Inc., US), with a mix of edge addresses and a small number of possible origin candidates. This is a mitigating factor only. It shows that the site is competently hosted and is not proof of legitimacy. Shared edge infrastructure of this kind also hosts malicious pages, and it cannot offset the confirmed threat listings.
Closing Assessment
The page should be treated as unsafe for any interaction beyond passive viewing. No wallet should be connected, no signatures or approvals granted, and no credentials or funds entered. Anyone who has already interacted with it should act promptly to secure their wallet and accounts.
Written analysis generated 2026-10-19 by the TrustSniffer Analysis Engine from the evidence in this report.
What the analysis found
4 findings contributed to this verdict, raised by governance, external reputation, page content, behaviour in a sandbox.
01 Governance
- A threat feed lists this domain as malicious, and that caps the score whatever the other checks found.Governance
rule:GOV_CRITICAL_BLACKLIST
02 External reputation
- An external threat feed lists this domain: either Google Safe Browsing marked it malicious, or a significant number of malware engines flagged it.External reputation
rule:EXT_BLACKLIST_CRITICAL
03 Page content
- The page appears to present itself as a known brand it is not verified to belong to.Page content
rule:PAGE_BRAND_SUSPECTED - The page has no description for search engines, which established sites usually provide.Page content
rule:PAGE_SEO_MISSING_META - The page carries none of the structured previews for search and social sharing that established sites usually provide.Page content
rule:PAGE_SEO_NO_STRUCTURED
04 Behaviour in a sandbox
- The page sent data to other domains many times while it was open.Behaviour in a sandbox
rule:BEHAV_EXTERNAL_POSTS_HEAVY
Identity verification
| Status | UNVERIFIED |
|---|---|
| Identity score | 30/100 |
| Identity verification confidence | 50% |
- No on-site identity signals detected
Identity verification measures whether the site can be independently connected to a real-world brand or person. It is separate from the classification confidence.
What TrustSniffer observed
First-party facts recorded during the assessment of vote-polls954.pages.dev.
- The request stayed on vote-polls954.pages.dev. It was not redirected to another domain. Clear
Domain intelligence
| Registrar | Not available |
|---|---|
| Hosting | Not available |
| Country | Not available |
| Server IP | 2606:4700:310c::ac42:2cce |
| Name servers | Not available |
| CDN / edge network | Lookup incomplete |
| SSL issuer | YE1 |
| SSL expiry | 2026-12-18 |
| Domain age | Not available (no registration date was returned) |
| Domain expiry | Not available |
| Archive first seen | Not available |
| Archive snapshots | Not available |
| Reputation | VirusTotal: 3 flagged | AbuseIPDB: 0% confidence, 0 reports | Google Safe Browsing: 1 match |
About this assessment
A trust score summarises the evidence TrustSniffer could collect about vote-polls954.pages.dev at assessment time. It is a starting point for your own judgement, not a guarantee: a high score means the signals were consistent with a legitimately operated site, a low or critical score means several risk patterns were present.
TrustSniffer assesses a website from the evidence it can collect at a point in time: domain registration and age, hosting and certificate, the content the site served, and third-party reputation feeds. A score is a summary of that evidence, not a guarantee and not a legal finding. There is no human rating and no user review in it. A site can change after it is assessed.