context safety score
A score of 32/100 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
credential harvesting
Login form on adxpremium.services collects email and password credentials via POST to /login. The page displays the 'Lupon Media' brand logo but the domain is adxpremium.services — a mismatch between the displayed brand identity and the actual hosting domain, consistent with a credential harvesting page impersonating a legitimate ad-tech platform. (location: page.html:48-83)
brand impersonation
The page renders the 'Lupon Media' brand logo (luponMediaBlack.svg / luponMediaWhite.svg) and copyright notice 'ADX Premium by Lupon Media' while operating from the unaffiliated domain adxpremium.services. This constitutes impersonation of the Lupon Media brand to lend legitimacy to the credential-harvesting login form. (location: page.html:46,88)
phishing
The page is a bare login portal — no navigation, no account registration, no password reset, no contextual content — hosted on adxpremium.services with a DV TLS certificate. This minimal login-only structure on a non-brand domain is a classic phishing page pattern designed to capture credentials under the guise of an ADX/ad-network login. (location: page.html:36-105)
hidden content
Hidden form fields '_token' (CSRF token value DrrfOqEaEBjU4YvXzeme4vrNbQgD5COFnC08vgvy), 'remember' (value=1), and 'referer' (empty) are embedded in the login form. The 'remember' field silently forces persistent session creation without user awareness, and the pre-populated CSRF token suggests a server-generated phishing kit rather than a static clone. (location: page.html:49-50)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/adxpremium.servicesCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
adxpremium.services currently scores 32/100 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.