context safety score
A score of 68/100 indicates minor risk signals were detected. The entity may be legitimate but has characteristics that warrant attention.
phishing
1 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host
malicious redirect
Meta refresh tag with content='0;URL=http://www.mortonsdirect.co.uk/oldglory/free-ad-form/' causes an immediate (0-second) redirect to an off-domain HTTP URL. The destination domain mortonsdirect.co.uk is unrelated to advintage.net, and the redirect is instantaneous with no user interaction required. (location: page.html:2 - <meta http-equiv="refresh" content="0;URL=http://www.mortonsdirect.co.uk/oldglory/free-ad-form/">)
malicious redirect
A visible anchor link also points to the same off-domain destination http://www.mortonsdirect.co.uk/oldglory/free-ad-form/ and is labelled as 'The new web address for Book Reviews', which is inconsistent with the site's stated purpose (Heritage Classifieds for vintage vehicles). The mismatch between site branding and link label is deceptive. (location: page.html:27 - <a href="http://www.mortonsdirect.co.uk/oldglory/free-ad-form/">)
hidden content
A hidden iframe (height=1, width=1, visibility:hidden, positioned at top:0 left:0) is injected into the DOM by inline JavaScript. The iframe loads external Cloudflare challenge-platform scripts. While this pattern is used legitimately by Cloudflare Bot Management, the iframe itself is invisible to users and injects a dynamic script tag, which warrants flagging as hidden content. (location: page.html:31 - inline script creating hidden iframe with a.style.visibility='hidden')
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/advintage.netCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
advintage.net currently scores 68/100 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.
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.