Is akon-and-t-pain-akon.hydr0.org safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
37/100

context safety score

A score of 37/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
92
behavior
60
content
0
graph
71

6 threat patterns detected

high

phishing

1 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host

medium

malicious redirect

The page is hosted on akon-and-t-pain-akon.hydr0.org but presents content cloned entirely from mp3.cc, including canonical URLs, CSS/JS assets, og:url, and all internal links pointing to mp3.cc. The subdomain acts as a shadow proxy/mirror of mp3.cc, redirecting users to the real domain for all interactions while operating under a different origin. The Tier 2 scan also flagged 1 redirect. (location: page.html:9 (canonical href), page.html:14 (og:url), page.html:18-19 (asset src/href), throughout all anchor hrefs)

high

brand impersonation

The site fully impersonates MP3.cc by cloning its branding, logo SVG, layout, page title ('MP3.cc'), copyright notice ('© 2017 – 2026 MP3.cc'), and all navigation/content. It is served from a completely different domain (hydr0.org subdomain) not affiliated with MP3.cc, constituting brand impersonation of an established music service. (location: page.html:5 (title), page.html:11 (og:site_name), page.html:652 (footer copyright), page.html:33-36 (logo))

high

malicious redirect

All audio file download/play URLs resolve through fine.sunproxy.net rather than mp3.cc or the hosting domain. The data-url attributes for every playlist item route through this third-party proxy domain (fine.sunproxy.net/file/...) with base64-encoded path tokens. This constitutes a traffic interception layer between the user and the actual MP3 content, consistent with a proxy designed to intercept or monetise downloads, potentially serving altered files or tracking users. (location: page.html:228,247,266,285,304,323,342,361,380,399,418,437,456,475,494,513,532,551,570,589,608,627 (data-url attributes on playlist-play anchors))

medium

hidden content

The base64-encoded strings embedded in all 'data-url' attributes (12 suspicious base64 blobs flagged by Tier 2 scan) encode opaque file paths on fine.sunproxy.net. While individually they appear to be encoded file tokens, the consistent use of base64 encoding to obscure destination paths across all download links prevents transparent inspection of the actual file endpoints. (location: page.html: all playlist-play anchor data-url attributes (lines 228,247,266,285,304,323,342,361,380,399,418,437,456,475,494,513,532,551,570,589,608,627))

medium

social engineering

The site presents itself as a legitimate, well-known MP3 download service (MP3.cc) while operating from an unaffiliated domain (hydr0.org). Users are socially engineered into trusting the site due to the faithful visual cloning of MP3.cc's interface, potentially causing them to download files from the unvetted fine.sunproxy.net proxy without awareness they are not on the genuine MP3.cc platform. (location: page.html: overall page structure and domain akon-and-t-pain-akon.hydr0.org vs. content claiming to be mp3.cc)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/akon-and-t-pain-akon.hydr0.org

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is akon-and-t-pain-akon.hydr0.org safe for AI agents to use?

akon-and-t-pain-akon.hydr0.org currently scores 37/100 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.

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.