Is 1c-cabinet.ru safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
32/100

context safety score

A score of 32/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
45
behavior
100
content
0
graph
30

6 threat patterns detected

high

tls connection failed

Could not establish TLS connection

high

phishing

Domain 1c-cabinet.ru uses a name closely mimicking '1C' (1С), the dominant Russian accounting and ERP software brand widely used by businesses and government. The 'cabinet' suffix impersonates a legitimate user portal/login cabinet, a common phishing pattern targeting 1C software users to harvest credentials. (location: domain: 1c-cabinet.ru)

high

brand impersonation

The domain name '1c-cabinet.ru' combines '1c' (referencing 1С, the major Russian business software company) with 'cabinet' (Russian term for a personal/user account portal). This construction directly impersonates the official 1C user account infrastructure to deceive users into believing they are accessing a legitimate 1C service. (location: domain: 1c-cabinet.ru)

critical

phishing

TLS is not connected and certificate is invalid (connected=false, cert_valid=false). A site impersonating a trusted software vendor's login portal while failing to serve a valid TLS certificate is a strong indicator of a phishing or fraudulent site that may harvest credentials over an insecure or spoofed connection. (location: metadata.json: tls fields)

high

credential harvesting

The combination of a brand-impersonating domain ('1c-cabinet.ru' mimicking a 1C personal account portal), invalid TLS, and an empty page response is consistent with a credential harvesting operation: the site may conditionally serve login forms to targeted users while appearing blank to crawlers and scanners. (location: domain: 1c-cabinet.ru, metadata.json, page.html (empty))

medium

hidden content

The page.html, page-text.txt, and page-hidden.txt files are all empty despite the site being reachable enough to have metadata collected. This blank/empty response to the scanner is consistent with cloaking: serving malicious or phishing content only to real user agents or specific geolocations while hiding content from automated analysis tools. (location: page.html, page-text.txt, page-hidden.txt (all empty))

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/1c-cabinet.ru

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

Common questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.

Is 1c-cabinet.ru safe for AI agents to use?

1c-cabinet.ru currently scores 32/100 with a suspicious verdict and low confidence. The goal is to protect agents from high-risk context before they act on it. Treat this as a decision signal: higher scores suggest lower observed risk, while lower scores mean you should add review or block this domain.

How should I interpret the score and verdict?

Use the score as a policy threshold: 80–100 is safe, 50–79 is caution, 20–49 is suspicious, and 0–19 is dangerous. Teams often auto-allow safe, require human review for caution/suspicious, and block dangerous.

How does brin compute this domain score?

brin evaluates four dimensions: identity (source trust), behavior (runtime patterns), content (malicious instructions), and graph (relationship risk). Analysis runs in tiers: static signals, deterministic pattern checks, then AI semantic analysis when needed.

What do identity, behavior, content, and graph mean for this domain?

Identity checks source trust, behavior checks unusual runtime patterns, content checks for malicious instructions, and graph checks risky relationships to other entities. Looking at sub-scores helps you understand why an entity passed or failed.

Why does brin scan packages, repos, skills, MCP servers, pages, and commits?

brin performs risk assessments on external context before it reaches an AI agent. It scores that context for threats like prompt injection, hijacking, credential harvesting, and supply chain attacks, so teams can decide whether to block, review, or proceed safely.

Can I rely on a safe verdict as a full security guarantee?

No. A safe verdict means no significant risk signals were detected in this scan. It is not a formal guarantee; assessments are automated and point-in-time, so combine scores with your own controls and periodic re-checks.

When should I re-check before using an entity?

Re-check before high-impact actions such as installs, upgrades, connecting MCP servers, executing remote code, or granting secrets. Use the API in CI or runtime gates so decisions are based on the latest scan.

Learn more in threat detection docs, how scoring works, and the API overview.

Last Scanned

March 4, 2026

Verdict Scale

safe80–100
caution50–79
suspicious20–49
dangerous0–19

Disclaimer

Assessments are automated and may contain errors. Findings are risk indicators, not confirmed threats. This is a point-in-time assessment; security posture can change.

start scoring agent dependencies.

integrate brin in minutes — one GET request is all it takes. query the api, browse the registry, or download the full dataset.