The domain tg-verification.online has been identified as a generic phishing threat and remains active with a high risk level. This site attempts to deceive visitors by presenting a fake loading page, likely to harvest login credentials or personal information. No specific brand is impersonated, but the domain name suggests it may target Telegram users.
PhishDestroy's analysis reveals that tg-verification.online is flagged by 4 out of 95 security vendors on VirusTotal and appears on 3 security blocklists. The domain was registered on May 23, 2026, through Registrar of Domain Names REG.RU LLC, and resolves to IP address 87.120.107.209. It uses an SSL certificate issued by Let's Encrypt (E8). Additionally, AlienVault OTX includes this domain in one threat intelligence pulse, indicating its involvement in malicious campaigns.
Given its active status and high risk level, users should avoid interacting with tg-verification.online entirely. PhishDestroy recommends verifying any suspicious links through official channels before entering personal data. If you have already visited this site, change your passwords immediately and enable two-factor authentication on affected accounts.
Extracted from stored page analysis
Observed indicators
0 wallet · 19 Telegram
Full extracted values, their blockchain and collection source. An address found in page content does not establish who controls it.
DOM Analysisanalyzed 2026年9月19日score 100/10011 brand signals
IoC Extractionscanned 2026年9月19日0 wallet · 19 Telegram IoCs
Favicon Hash
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.
Evidence layersAvailability: Content servingContent: Content served at rootDNS: ResolvedRegistration: Unknown
Latest HTTP observationコンテンツ公開中Ordinary HTTP content served90%2026-10-19 22:36:31 UTC
RDAP registration不明
Observed timelinelast reachable: 2026-10-19 22:36:31 UTClast content: 2026-10-19 22:36:31 UTC
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.
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.
(RU)
