Is 2-chainz-feat-asap-rocky-rick-ross.hydr0.org safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
34/100

context safety score

A score of 34/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
82
behavior
60
content
0
graph
71

7 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

high

phishing

1 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host

high

brand impersonation

The page is served from hydr0.org but fully impersonates MP3.cc: logo, title, canonical URL, og:site_name, all CSS/JS assets, navigation, and footer copyright all reference mp3.cc. Users and AI agents would believe they are interacting with the legitimate MP3.cc site. (location: page.html:5,9,11,14,18,33-36,671 — domain hydr0.org presenting as mp3.cc)

high

malicious redirect

The canonical tag and all internal links redirect to mp3.cc (https://mp3.cc/t/1615914912-2-chainz-feat-asap-rocky-rick-ross/) while the page is actually served from 2-chainz-feat-asap-rocky-rick-ross.hydr0.org. This bait-and-switch subdomain technique is used to intercept traffic intended for the legitimate site. (location: page.html:9 — <link rel='canonical' href='https://mp3.cc/t/...'> served from hydr0.org)

high

malicious redirect

All 20 audio playback URLs route through fine.sunproxy.net with base64-obfuscated file paths (e.g. NDgwdkFuTUxJZ0tHbEJUVFE0...) rather than the mp3.cc CDN. This third-party proxy intercepts all media requests and the actual file content cannot be verified. This matches the 1 redirect and 12 suspicious base64 blobs flagged in Tier 2. (location: page.html:228,247,266,285,304,323,342,361,380,399,418,437,456,475,494,513,532,551,570,589 — data-url attributes pointing to fine.sunproxy.net)

medium

obfuscated code

All 20 media file URLs use base64-encoded opaque tokens as path components on fine.sunproxy.net (e.g. /file/NDgwdkFuTUxJZ0tHbEJUVFE0QUZzNUtmT3Q5UlZlNlAveTNlSGJkYkhO...). Decoding reveals binary/encrypted payloads rather than plain file paths, hiding the true destination of file downloads. This accounts for the 12 suspicious base64 blobs flagged in Tier 2. (location: page.html — all data-url attributes; fine.sunproxy.net base64 file path tokens)

medium

social engineering

The site lures users with free MP3 downloads of popular artists (2 Chainz, ASAP Rocky, Rick Ross, etc.) served through an unofficial third-party proxy domain (hydr0.org / sunproxy.net), enticing users to interact with unverified file downloads from an impersonated brand site. The lure of free copyrighted music is a classic social engineering technique to drive traffic to malicious infrastructure. (location: page.html:224 — playlist of free MP3 downloads; metadata.json — domain hydr0.org)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/2-chainz-feat-asap-rocky-rick-ross.hydr0.org

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is 2-chainz-feat-asap-rocky-rick-ross.hydr0.org safe for AI agents to use?

2-chainz-feat-asap-rocky-rick-ross.hydr0.org currently scores 34/100 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 25, 2026

Verdict Scale

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

Trust Graph

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.