VirusTotal
9 / 91 engine detections
打开报告“Acrodrome Protocol”
The sent-report ledger records the first outgoing report at .
The recorded recipient is abuse@name.com.
The latest stored availability evidence still shows the domain reachable; 5 months has elapsed since the first outgoing report.
ICANN RAA §3.18 describes registrar abuse-contact and handling obligations. This section records outgoing timestamps, listed recipients, case identifiers, and later availability. It does not by itself prove receipt, acknowledgement, investigation, remediation, or contractual non-compliance.
钓鱼: aerodromev2.finance — 最后已知的活跃状态 (HTTP 308). 证据摘要: VirusTotal 9/91 (alphaMountain.ai, BitDefender, Forcepoint ThreatSeeker, Fortinet, G-Data); 2 external…
为保留原始取证记录,下方的 PhishDestroy AI 详细分析仍使用英文。
9 / 91 engine detections
打开报告Suspicious
打开报告checked — no detections recorded
打开报告checked — no match recorded
23 community references
打开报告No threat flag
打开报告No malicious flag
打开报告Results reflect each source’s collection time. Zero detections do not guarantee safety. OTX references are community publications.
PhishDestroy threat report
The domain aerodromev2.finance has been identified as a phishing infrastructure specifically designed to impersonate Aerodrome Protocol, a decentralized finance platform. This domain is classified as a generic phishing threat targeting users through fraudulent interfaces mimicking legitimate crypto services. As of the latest assessment, the domain has been taken offline, but prior activity indicates active credential harvesting and asset diversion attempts. Infrastructure analysis reveals the domain was registered through Name.com, Inc. on April 26, 2026, and resolves to the IP address 104.21.9.3, which is associated with Cloudflare’s content delivery network. Despite its malicious intent, the domain was not flagged by any of the 95 vendors on VirusTotal at the time of analysis. However, it appears on three security blocklists, including MetaMask and PhishDestroy, and holds a Gridinsoft trust score of 0/100. The site employed technologies such as Bootstrap, Unpkg, jsDelivr, AOS, and HTTP/3, alongside a Let’s Encrypt SSL certificate, to create a deceptive appearance of legitimacy. Current status confirms the domain is offline, but the infrastructure remains a potential risk for re-emergence or reuse. Organizations and individuals are advised to block the domain and its associated IP at the network level. Users should verify all crypto-related interactions through official channels and enable multi-factor authentication where possible. Security teams are recommended to monitor for similar domains leveraging Cloudflare IPs or Let’s Encrypt certificates in phishing campaigns, particularly those impersonating decentralized finance protocols.
Last checked
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.
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.
Edge-IP 声誉不属于此域。
ryan.ns.cloudflare.comLocation describes the IP network.
58aecc582d524ec5008d9ed04a34577aa397b6686594e22b063d078b68d006d5Saved certificate metadata. Certificate dates without a timezone are shown as stored. Transport encryption does not establish that the site is trustworthy.
Google PageSpeed Insights — mobile performance audit of aerodromev2.finance · checked Jun 26, 2026
An estimated time describes an observation window. It does not prove a registrar action or the exact moment a site became unavailable.
Compare what a browser and a crawler receive, and check for Keitaro traffic routing.
redirect: raw=redirect_308; http=308; via=https_proxy; location=https://aerodromev2.finance/; server=cloudflare
aerodromev2.finance
Dated changes retained by the monitor and source collectors. Newest observations appear first; source states are not proof of a takedown.
未知→redirected
http_redirect
未知→redirected
http_redirect
未知→redirected
http_redirect
未知→redirected
http_redirect
未知→redirected
http_redirect
未知→redirected
http_redirect
未知→redirected
http_redirect
未知→redirected
http_redirect
未知→redirected
http_redirect
未知→redirected
http_redirect
未知→redirected
http_redirect
未知→redirected
http_redirect
未知→redirected
http_redirect
未知→redirected
http_redirect
未知→redirected
http_redirect
未知→redirected
http_redirect
未知→redirected
http_redirect
未知→redirected
http_redirect
1→Observation retained
23 community references
View source9/91 engine detections
View sourceNo threat flag
View sourceaerodromev2.finance
View sourcePD-20260426-6293B4
由 1 名社区成员报告;首次发现于 2026年4月26日
PD-20260426-6293B4 Recipient: abuse@name.com 如果您输入了帐户凭据、个人或付款信息,或者从此域下载了文件,请立即采取措施。以下资源可帮助您报告事件并保护自己。
选择您所在的国家/地区以获取 官方网络犯罪联系人 或 创建投诉草稿 →。
Template-based draft · optional AI wording assistance requires separate consent
Choose the steps that match what you shared. Keep a copy of this report alongside your own records.
Stop using the suspicious site. Open the real service through its official app or an address you already trust.
Keep original emails, receipts, messages and screenshots in a secure place. A factual timeline helps the receiving authority understand what happened. IC3 evidence guidance ↗
aerodromev2.finance)即使你并不了解所有细节—— 不管怎样都要提交报告. 即使信息不完整,对调查仍有帮助。
A report is not a guarantee of recovery or investigation, but prompt, accurate transaction data can help authorities and service providers trace the incident.
Further guidance: NIST · phishing responseFBI IC3 · reports & evidenceFTC · recovery scams
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.