Is 2987529902.hydr0.org safe?

cautionmedium confidence
58/100

context safety score

A score of 58/100 indicates minor risk signals were detected. The entity may be legitimate but has characteristics that warrant attention.

identity
82
behavior
80
content
37
graph
70

5 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

high

malicious redirect

The page is served from subdomain 2987529902.hydr0.org but all canonical URLs, links, CSS, JS, and branding point to mp3.cc. The canonical tag explicitly declares 'https://mp3.cc/' as the authoritative URL while the actual serving domain is a numeric subdomain of hydr0.org. This indicates the hydr0.org domain is acting as an unauthorized mirror or proxy of mp3.cc, redirecting/proxying traffic through an unrelated third-party domain. (location: page.html:9 - <link rel='canonical' href='https://mp3.cc/'>; metadata.json - domain: 2987529902.hydr0.org)

high

brand impersonation

The site fully impersonates MP3.cc — reproducing its title, logo, branding, CSS, JavaScript, and all content — while being served from 2987529902.hydr0.org. All static assets (CSS, JS, images) are loaded from mp3.cc, and the page presents itself as MP3.cc without disclosure that it is a third-party mirror. The contact email 'hydrofm@yandex.com' and the domain 'hydr0.org' indicate a different operator than mp3.cc. (location: page.html:5 (title), page.html:9 (canonical), page.html:1184 (footer copyright showing MP3.cc with hydrofm@yandex.com contact))

medium

malicious redirect

All audio file playback URLs route through 'fine.sunproxy.net', a third-party proxy domain not affiliated with mp3.cc. Audio files carry the tag '(Hydr0.org)' in their filenames, confirming they are served via the hydr0.org infrastructure rather than mp3.cc's own servers. This proxy layer intercepts user media requests and could be used for traffic analysis, ad injection, or serving malicious content. (location: page.html:228 - data-url='https://fine.sunproxy.net/file/...(Hydr0.org).mp3' (and all subsequent playlist entries))

low

hidden content

The Tier 2 scan flagged 12 suspicious base64 blobs. Inspection of the HTML confirms numerous long base64-encoded strings embedded as path components in all media URLs routed through fine.sunproxy.net (e.g. NDgwdkFuTUxJZ0tHbEJUVFE0QUZzMjJBeit2dnUv...). While these appear to be encoded file tokens or signed URLs rather than injected payloads, their volume and uniform pattern across all 40+ tracks is consistent with an obfuscated proxy routing mechanism that obscures the true file origin and may encode tracking or session parameters. (location: page.html:228, 247, 266, 285 (and all playlist data-url attributes))

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/2987529902.hydr0.org

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is 2987529902.hydr0.org safe for AI agents to use?

2987529902.hydr0.org currently scores 58/100 with a caution verdict and medium 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

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.