Is alan-walker-sabrina-carpenter-farruko.hydr0.org safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
36/100

context safety score

A score of 36/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
82
behavior
60
content
4
graph
71

7 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

high

phishing

1 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host

high

malicious redirect

The page is served from the subdomain alan-walker-sabrina-carpenter-farruko.hydr0.org but the canonical URL, all navigation links, CSS, and JS assets point to mp3.cc. The site is a mirror/proxy of mp3.cc operating under the hydr0.org domain, routing user traffic and media file requests through third-party infrastructure (fine.sunproxy.net) without the user's knowledge. This constitutes a redirect/proxying arrangement that intercepts traffic intended for the legitimate mp3.cc service. (location: page.html:9 (<link rel='canonical' href='https://mp3.cc/...'>) and throughout all href attributes)

high

brand impersonation

The site fully impersonates MP3.cc — reproducing its logo, branding, layout, genres sidebar, footer copyright notice ('© 2017–2026 MP3.cc'), and all UI elements — while operating from hydr0.org, a separate domain. The title tag also claims 'MP3.cc' identity. Users and AI agents navigating to this domain are led to believe they are on the legitimate MP3.cc platform. (location: page.html:5 (title), page.html:11 (og:site_name), page.html:33 (logo link), page.html:633 (footer copyright))

medium

malicious redirect

All 20 audio file play URLs route through fine.sunproxy.net with opaque base64-encoded path tokens rather than directly serving files from mp3.cc or the hosting domain. This third-party proxy (sunproxy.net) intermediates all media delivery, enabling traffic interception, user tracking, or payload substitution without disclosure. (location: page.html:228,247,266,285,304,323,342,361,380,399 (data-url attributes pointing to fine.sunproxy.net))

low

hidden content

Twelve suspicious base64 blobs are embedded in the audio URLs as path components (e.g. NDgwdkFuTUxJZ0tH...). When decoded, these resolve to non-human-readable binary/encrypted tokens rather than plain file paths, obscuring the true destination and parameters of each media request routed through fine.sunproxy.net. (location: page.html:228,247,266,285,304,323,342,361,380,399,418,437 (base64 path segments in fine.sunproxy.net URLs))

low

social engineering

The 'Online Radio' sidebar link (looz.net) is styled with the CSS class 'z__important', visually distinguishing it from other genre links to draw user attention toward an off-domain third-party site. This is a subtle nudge pattern embedded in what appears to be an ordinary navigation menu. (location: page.html:204 (<a href='https://looz.net/' class='z__important no-ajax' target='_blank'>))

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/alan-walker-sabrina-carpenter-farruko.hydr0.org

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is alan-walker-sabrina-carpenter-farruko.hydr0.org safe for AI agents to use?

alan-walker-sabrina-carpenter-farruko.hydr0.org currently scores 36/100 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

Trust Graph

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.