Is arianna-feat-pitbull-sexy-people.hydr0.org safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
42/100

context safety score

A score of 42/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
92
behavior
60
content
10
graph
70

5 threat patterns detected

high

phishing

5 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host

medium

malicious redirect

The scanned URL (arianna-feat-pitbull-sexy-people.hydr0.org) does not serve its own content — it hosts a full clone/mirror of mp3.cc, impersonating the legitimate MP3.cc service. The canonical tag, all asset URLs, and all navigation links point back to mp3.cc, indicating this subdomain is a shadow copy used to intercept traffic and redirect users to third-party file proxy infrastructure. (location: page.html:9 — <link rel='canonical' href='https://mp3.cc/t/3503180308-arianna-feat-pitbull-sexy-people/'/>)

high

brand impersonation

The page fully impersonates MP3.cc (logo, branding, site structure, copyright notice '© 2017–2026 MP3.cc') while being served from the unrelated domain arianna-feat-pitbull-sexy-people.hydr0.org. All visual and structural elements are copied from the legitimate site without authorization, constituting brand impersonation to build false trust with visitors. (location: page.html:5,11,33-36,614)

high

malicious redirect

All audio file play links resolve through fine.sunproxy.net, a third-party proxy/CDN not associated with mp3.cc. The base64-encoded path parameters in these URLs (12 suspicious base64 blobs flagged by Tier 2) obfuscate the actual file destinations. Users clicking play are routed through an unknown intermediary proxy that could serve malware, track users, or substitute content. (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='https://fine.sunproxy.net/file/NDgw...')

medium

social engineering

The site presents itself as a legitimate free MP3 download service, mimicking the trusted MP3.cc brand on an unrelated hydr0.org subdomain. The subdomain name (arianna-feat-pitbull-sexy-people.hydr0.org) is crafted to match popular search queries, luring users searching for specific music content into visiting an impersonation site that routes downloads through an uncontrolled proxy. (location: metadata.json — domain: arianna-feat-pitbull-sexy-people.hydr0.org; page.html:5)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/arianna-feat-pitbull-sexy-people.hydr0.org

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is arianna-feat-pitbull-sexy-people.hydr0.org safe for AI agents to use?

arianna-feat-pitbull-sexy-people.hydr0.org currently scores 42/100 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.