context safety score
A score of 24/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.
encoded payload
suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content
phishing
1 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host
brand impersonation
The page is served from 24videos.space but presents itself entirely as '24video' (my.24video.link / 24video.porn / 24video.link). All assets, links, canonical URL, logo, favicon, scripts, and CSS are loaded from my.24video.link while the actual serving domain is 24videos.space — a lookalike domain impersonating the legitimate 24video brand. The canonical tag points to https://www.24video.porn/videos/ and all navigation links redirect to my.24video.link, making the proxy/mirror nature of this site deceptive. (location: page.html:9 (canonical), page.html:8-18 (all asset hrefs), page.html:27 (logo link))
malicious redirect
The site acts as a transparent proxy/doorway page for my.24video.link. Users arriving at 24videos.space are served content that routes all interactions (clicks, searches, navigation) to the different domain my.24video.link. This classic cloaking/redirect pattern is used to funnel traffic while masking the destination and can intercept referrer data and user behavior. (location: page.html:27,50-236,253,284,295,323,973-986 (all hrefs point to my.24video.link))
hidden content
A third-party script is dynamically injected from https://Octo25.me/lib.js with a cache-busting timestamp and a tracking ID 'ie07b8-1a3766'. This script is loaded asynchronously and appended to document.body at runtime, making its contents invisible to static analysis. The domain Octo25.me is unrelated to the site's stated identity and the obfuscated ID suggests ad-fraud, tracker, or potentially malicious payload delivery infrastructure. (location: page.html:1046-1055)
obfuscated code
A LiveInternet tracking beacon is injected via document.write() using runtime-constructed string concatenation with escape() calls on document.referrer, screen dimensions, document.URL, and document.title — all harvested and sent to counter.yadro.ru. This pattern obfuscates the data exfiltration by constructing the tracking pixel URL dynamically rather than declaring it statically, evading simple script-src CSP rules. (location: page.html:1056-1065)
hidden content
An empty div with id 'ie07b8-1a3766-8912' and class 'ie07b8-1a3766' is injected as a placeholder/anchor for the Octo25.me external script. This invisible DOM element is used as a mount point for injected ad/tracking content and would not be visible to users. (location: page.html:1045)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/24videos.spaceCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
24videos.space currently scores 24/100 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
integrate brin in minutes — one GET request is all it takes. query the api, browse the registry, or download the full dataset.