PhishDestroy identifies synmark.online as a suspected PayPal phishing domain currently under active investigation. This domain mimics legitimate financial services to deceive users into disclosing sensitive credentials under the guise of account verification or transaction processing. The threat is classified as generic_phishing, indicating a broad but deliberate attempt to harvest login details, payment information, or personal data through fraudulent web forms and spoofed interfaces. Users interacting with this domain may unknowingly expose financial credentials or become targets of follow-up social engineering attacks.
The evidence supporting this threat assessment is substantial. Domain intelligence reveals that synmark.online was registered on April 19, 2026, through Global Domain Group LLC, a registrar with minimal oversight reputation. The domain resolves to IP address 37.49.229.75 and utilizes a Let's Encrypt SSL certificate to appear legitimate. Critically, VirusTotal currently reports 13 out of 95 antivirus engines detecting malicious content, which is not uncommon for newly registered phishing domains that evade early detection systems. This low detection rate emphasizes the importance of proactive user vigilance and real-time threat intelligence.
If you have visited synmark.online, immediately cease any interaction and disconnect from the site. Do not enter any login credentials, payment details, or personal information. Scan your device using updated antivirus software and consider changing passwords for critical accounts, especially email and financial services. Report the domain to your email provider and financial institutions to prevent further targeting. Monitor your accounts for unauthorized transactions or suspicious activity. For continued protection, use browser extensions that block known phishing domains and enable multi-factor authentication on all sensitive accounts. PhishDestroy advises users to treat synmark.online as a confirmed threat until further investigation updates its risk level.
DOM Analysisanalyzed 2026年7月29日score 73/1001 brand signal
Submitted URLhttps://synmark.online/
ケース ID
ICANN OVERSIGHT
認定と RAA の背景
Registrar accreditation and DNS abuse obligations
For this gTLD, the registrar above operates under an ICANN accreditation agreement. The links below provide the official fee schedule and current DNS abuse compliance guidance.
Accreditation is a contract, not a safety certification.
RAA §3.18 establishes abuse-contact and handling requirements. This report can document stored outbound notices and later technical observations; it does not by itself establish receipt, investigation, remediation, or contractual non-compliance.
Saved certificate metadata. Certificate dates without a timezone are shown as stored. Transport encryption does not establish that the site is trustworthy.
Primary outcomeDNS 非アクティブreason: DNS NXDOMAIN80% confidence
Attributionsource: Dns Cache
Evidence layersAvailability: DNS inactiveContent: UnreachableDNS: NXDOMAINRegistration: Unknown
Latest HTTP observation不明Probe Inconclusive20%2026-10-19 01:15:03 UTC
RDAP registration不明
Observed timelinelast reachable: 2026-09-15 22:18:12 UTCcurrent episode first observed: 2026-09-30 16:14:55 UTCobserved RIP window: 2026-09-15 22:18:12 UTC → 2026-09-30 16:14:55 UTC · 353.95hmidpoint estimate ≈ 2026-09-23 07:16:33 UTC · precision low · basis bounded
Availability, content, DNS and registration are independent evidence layers. NXDOMAIN, an unreachable origin or missing content alone does not prove registrar action. A registrar or provider is credited only when a direct technical marker identifies that actor. Report causality is shown separately.
Last analyzed Previous stored snapshot: 14 detections
alphaMountain.ai
BitDefender
Chong Lua Dao
CyRadar
ESET
Forcepoint ThreatSeeker
Fortinet
G-Data
Gridinsoft
カスペルスキー
Lionic
SafeToOpen
SOCRadar
ソフォス
VIPRE
Webroot
サイトパフォーマンス分析
Google PageSpeed Insights — mobile performance audit of synmark.online· checked Apr 20, 2026
18
Poor
Performance
FCP
11.19s
First Contentful Paint
LCP
34.22s
Largest Contentful Paint
CLS
0.693
Cumulative Layout Shift
TBT
566ms
Total Blocking Time
SI
12.29s
Speed Index
Powered by Google PageSpeed Insights · Mobile strategy · Scores: 90-100 Good50-89 Needs Work0-49 Poor
Registration & observation details8
Availability observations
Last reachable observation
Outcome first observed
Observation window starts
Observation window ends
Estimated change time
Observation window · hours
353.95
Estimate basis
Bounded by observations
Estimate precision
Low
An estimated time describes an observation window. It does not prove a registrar action or the exact moment a site became unavailable.
Check for cloaking
Compare what a browser and a crawler receive, and check for Keitaro traffic routing.
No cloaking flag in this check
unavailable: raw=connection_error; http=0; via=http_proxy; error=SOCKSHTTPConnectionPool(host='synmark.online', port=80): Max retries exceeded with url: / (Caused by NewConnectionError(
synmark.online
Stored observation history10
Dated changes retained by the monitor and source collectors. Newest observations appear first; source states are not proof of a takedown.
Keep original emails, receipts, messages and screenshots in a secure place. A factual timeline helps the receiving authority understand what happened. IC3 evidence guidance ↗
Payment records — if you paid, save the receipt, amount, date, payment provider and recipient details.
Your bank or payment provider — contact its fraud team promptly through official contact details if money or card information was exposed.
地元の警察 — たとえ直ちに行動を起こせなくても、公式な記録が残される
A report is not a guarantee of recovery or investigation, but prompt, accurate transaction data can help authorities and service providers trace the incident.
詐欺による金銭の返還を装った詐欺 — fraudsters pose as recovery agents and demand upfront fees. Never share a seed phrase or pay before independently verifying the provider
About this reportSources, observation dates and corrections
This report combines saved page captures, registration and network records, scanner results and PhishDestroy reporting history. Each source keeps its own observation date. Open a source report to inspect the original result.
The AI-assisted analysis was written on . It describes the evidence available at that time; later source checks can change.
A capture documents what was shown. A scanner result records that provider’s assessment at the time of its check. Neither a valid certificate nor a zero-detection result is a guarantee of safety.
Gridinsoft Analysis
1 / 100
