context safety score
A score of 67/100 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
Page is served from aphex-twin-remix.hydr0.org but canonical URL, Open Graph tags, all navigation links, CSS, and JS assets all point to mp3.cc. The hydr0.org subdomain acts as an unlabeled proxy/mirror that silently redirects brand identity and traffic attribution to mp3.cc, obscuring the true content origin from users and crawlers. (location: page.html:9 (canonical), page.html:14 (og:url), page.html:18-19 (asset URLs))
brand impersonation
One playlist entry lists the artist as 'Apex Twin' (not the correct 'Aphex Twin'), with a distinct artist profile URL (mp3.cc/t/1032269921-apex-twin/). This typosquat artist name on a page themed around 'Aphex Twin Remix' may deceive users into believing they are downloading authentic Aphex Twin content when the attribution is to a different artist entity. (location: page.html:609-614)
obfuscated code
All 22 audio file URLs are routed through fine.sunproxy.net with long base64-encoded path segments (12 flagged as suspicious blobs). Double-decoding reveals binary-encrypted tokens rather than plaintext paths, meaning the actual file storage locations are fully obfuscated behind an opaque proxy layer. This prevents analysis of where audio files are actually hosted. (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)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/aphex-twin-remix.hydr0.orgCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
aphex-twin-remix.hydr0.org currently scores 67/100 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.