Is archive.is safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
29/100

context safety score

A score of 29/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
50
behavior
80
content
0
graph
30

9 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

medium

malicious redirect

script/meta redirect patterns detected in page source

high

prompt injection

HTML comment '<!-- brin-agent/1.0 -->' is embedded in the page source, likely targeting AI crawlers or agents by name, attempting to influence agent behavior or identification. (location: page.html:14)

medium

social engineering

Page presents a fake CAPTCHA/security-check interstitial ('One more step - Please complete the security check to access') to manipulate users into interacting with the page under false pretenses of legitimacy. (location: page.html:25-32)

high

hidden content

A div element is positioned off-screen at left:-250px, top:-250px (absolute positioning), rendering content invisible to users but potentially readable by bots or scrapers. (location: page.html:79 (style: left:-250px; top:-250px; position:absolute))

high

malicious redirect

JavaScript manipulates browser history via window.history.pushState to rewrite the URL to '/', obscuring the true page location, and uses window.location.replace(h) to silently redirect after CAPTCHA completion to an attacker-controlled destination encoded in the original URL. (location: page.html:103-104, 117-118)

medium

hidden content

A setInterval beacon silently sends randomized fetch requests to 'https://gyrovague.com/tag/<random>/' every 50 minutes with referrerPolicy:'no-referrer' and mode:'no-cors', functioning as a covert tracking or data-exfiltration ping to a third-party domain not disclosed to the user. (location: page.html:136)

high

brand impersonation

The page impersonates Cloudflare's CAPTCHA challenge UI (layout, wording, CSS structure, and reCAPTCHA widget placement are cloned from Cloudflare's 'Under Attack' page), but is served from archive.is, not Cloudflare. A commented-out LinkedIn reCAPTCHA sitekey is also present, suggesting the template has been used to impersonate multiple brands. (location: page.html:107-109)

high

credential harvesting

The reCAPTCHA response token and the full original URL (including any credentials or tokens in query parameters) are POSTed to '/cdn-cgi/l/chk_captcha' — a path mimicking Cloudflare's legitimate endpoint but on a non-Cloudflare domain — enabling harvesting of CAPTCHA tokens and any sensitive URL parameters. (location: page.html:111-114)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/archive.is

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is archive.is safe for AI agents to use?

archive.is currently scores 29/100 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 4, 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.