context safety score
A score of 42/100 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
js obfuscation
JavaScript uses Function constructor for runtime code generation
brand impersonation
The page at https://8x8.com is not rendering the legitimate 8x8.com website. Instead it is serving a Vercel Security Checkpoint interstitial page. The title, footer, and all visible content identify this as a Vercel-hosted page, not the expected 8x8 UCaaS/CCaaS brand. A visitor or AI agent navigating to 8x8.com is being presented with a third-party infrastructure page rather than 8x8's actual content, which masks the real site and could be used to intercept traffic or fingerprint users before forwarding them. (location: page.html <title>, <footer>, page-text.txt)
obfuscated code
The page contains a large, heavily obfuscated JavaScript module using multiple layers of string-array rotation, numeric index obfuscation, and self-defending anti-tamper patterns (functions that call toString().search() on themselves to detect devtools). The obfuscated code dynamically assembles DOM content, manages challenge/response messaging via MessageChannel, and loads an external worker script from a constructed URL (Vercel's challenge worker). The obfuscation style matches known anti-bot bypass obfuscation but is indistinguishable from malicious obfuscation without full deobfuscation — it hides the full logic of what is executed in the visitor's browser. (location: page.html <script type='module'> block, lines 2-3)
malicious redirect
The page intercepts the user's navigation to 8x8.com and gates access behind a JavaScript-based challenge. The script uses location.reload() on success and dynamically modifies displayed content based on a remote challenge response. An embedded token 'I' contains a base64+signed payload: '2.1772617081.60.MmJjNGQxODE1ZDdmNThlYzEwMGYxMjczMDc4Nzk4NjU7N2IyMjZlYWM7MzVhOTkwN2E4ZjU1NjhjYTZiMTlmMTQ1YmU4ODY5ZmZjYjc4ZDQxNTszO9dzan09D5rpUH1KcdCf6P8IKEF70KnxKWBhUO0s5SHdnUadCxc4fCaQwDqLtgw=.ad770a943a0b87766a48087134e33c08'. This token is transmitted to an external Vercel worker endpoint, meaning the visitor's browser fingerprint and request metadata are sent to Vercel infrastructure before any 8x8 content is served. (location: page.html, JavaScript variable I and worker MessageChannel logic)
social engineering
The interstitial displays 'We're verifying your browser' in the visitor's detected language (supports 20+ languages) and shows a spinning loader, creating a false sense of a routine security check. The message 'Website owner? Click here to fix' with a link to https://vercel.link/security-checkpoint is shown only in a hidden container that becomes visible under certain conditions, suggesting the page is designed to appear as a normal, trustworthy verification step to lower user suspicion while the challenge runs. (location: page.html #header-text, #fix-container, page-text.txt)
hidden content
The #fix-container div is initialized with style='display: none;' and is only revealed dynamically by JavaScript under specific challenge failure conditions. Additionally, the #root div starts as display:none and is made visible only after the JS challenge completes. This means the full content and behavior of the page is hidden from non-JS rendering agents and static scanners. (location: page.html <div id='fix-container' style='display: none;'>, <div id='root'>)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/8x8.comCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
8x8.com currently scores 42/100 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.