context safety score
A score of 43/100 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
cloaking
Page conditionally redirects based on referrer or user-agent
cloaking
Page loads content in transparent or zero-size iframe overlay
malicious redirect
An external script is loaded from htagpa.tech (//htagpa.tech/c/aawsat.com.js), an unrecognized third-party domain with no apparent affiliation to the site or any known analytics/ad provider. This script executes with full page context and could redirect users, inject content, or exfiltrate data. (location: page.html:195)
obfuscated code
A CSS stylesheet is dynamically injected via a <style> element using @import from draftdesgin.srpcdigital.com with a randomized cache-busting query string (Math.random()). The subdomain contains a misspelling ('desgin' instead of 'design'), which is a hallmark of a typosquatted or rogue subdomain. Dynamic random-param loading bypasses caching and can serve variable payloads. (location: page.html:4-8)
credential harvesting
The l5id.com tracker script (l5v3s.js) explicitly calls window.l5plow('enableFormTracking'), which instruments all form inputs on the page for data collection. Combined with reporting to tracker.srmg-cdp.com, this can capture credentials or PII entered into any form on the page before submission. (location: page.html:56-76)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/aawsat.comCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
aawsat.com currently scores 43/100 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.