Is anna-feat-madman-and-gemitaiz.hydr0.org safe?

cautionmedium confidence
55/100

context safety score

A score of 55/100 indicates minor risk signals were detected. The entity may be legitimate but has characteristics that warrant attention.

identity
92
behavior
60
content
34
graph
72

6 threat patterns detected

high

phishing

3 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host

medium

malicious redirect

The page is hosted on a subdomain of hydr0.org (anna-feat-madman-and-gemitaiz.hydr0.org) but all canonical URLs, assets, and links point to mp3.cc. The canonical tag explicitly redirects crawlers and agents to https://mp3.cc/t/123604461-anna-feat-madman-and-gemitaiz/, and the page content is scraped/mirrored from mp3.cc. This constitutes a redirect/cloaking setup where the serving domain differs from the declared canonical domain. (location: page.html:9 - <link rel='canonical' href='https://mp3.cc/t/123604461-anna-feat-madman-and-gemitaiz/'>)

medium

brand impersonation

The site at hydr0.org impersonates MP3.cc by reproducing its full UI, branding, logo, and content. The page title, og:site_name, logo text, footer copyright, and all navigation links present the site as 'MP3.cc' while the actual serving domain is hydr0.org. The footer copyright reads '© 2017 – 2026 MP3.cc' on a non-mp3.cc domain. (location: page.html:5,11,33-36,652 - title tag, og:site_name, logo, footer)

medium

malicious redirect

All audio file URLs (data-url attributes on play links) point to fine.sunproxy.net, a third-party proxy domain unrelated to either hydr0.org or mp3.cc. Users clicking play are served files from fine.sunproxy.net, which is a hidden intermediary that could serve malicious payloads or track users. The domain 'sunproxy.net' suggests a proxy/CDN used to launder file serving. (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)

low

hidden content

All 12 data-url values in playlist play links contain long Base64-encoded strings embedded within the fine.sunproxy.net file paths. These Base64 blobs are opaque encoded parameters whose decoded content is not visible to users and matches the 12 suspicious base64 blobs flagged in Tier 2 analysis. While they may encode file routing info, they obscure the true destination of audio file requests. (location: page.html:228,247,266,285,304,323,342,361,380,399,418,437,456,475,494,513,532,551,570,589 - data-url Base64 path segments in fine.sunproxy.net URLs)

low

social engineering

The site presents itself as a legitimate free MP3 download service (impersonating MP3.cc) to entice users into clicking download and play links that route through third-party proxy infrastructure (fine.sunproxy.net). The deceptive domain setup (hydr0.org serving mp3.cc-branded content) is consistent with a site designed to mislead users about where they are and what they are downloading. (location: page.html:5,652 - page title and footer; overall site structure)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/anna-feat-madman-and-gemitaiz.hydr0.org

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is anna-feat-madman-and-gemitaiz.hydr0.org safe for AI agents to use?

anna-feat-madman-and-gemitaiz.hydr0.org currently scores 55/100 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.

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.