Is artfut.com safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
41/100

context safety score

A score of 41/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
100
behavior
60
content
10
graph
30

5 threat patterns detected

high

phishing

1 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host

high

brand impersonation

The domain artfut.com serves a page fully styled and branded as 'Admitad' (admitad.com), including Admitad's logo, favicon, Open Graph metadata, and organizational schema markup. The actual domain artfut.com has no affiliation with Admitad. This constitutes impersonation of the legitimate Admitad brand on an unrelated domain. (location: page.html: <title>Admitad</title>, og:site_name, og:url pointing to admitad.com, favicon from cdn.sites.admitad.com, schema.org Organization block (lines 144-155))

high

social engineering

The page dynamically injects the current hostname into the page title area with the message 'The domain [hostname] is owned by Admitad company', creating a false legitimacy claim for any domain this template is deployed on. This is designed to convince visitors (or automated agents) that any arbitrary domain is officially owned by Admitad, lending unwarranted trust to potentially malicious domains. (location: page.html lines 156-158: document.getElementById('domain').innerHTML = 'The domain ' + window.location.hostname +'<br>is owned by Admitad company')

medium

malicious redirect

All navigation links, canonical URLs, og:url, hreflang, and dns-prefetch directives point to www.admitad.com rather than the actual serving domain artfut.com. This misdirects crawlers, agents, and users into attributing the page's content and reputation to admitad.com, and may funnel traffic or trust signals away from the true host domain. (location: page.html lines 12, 19, 24, 74, 154: href/content pointing to https://www.admitad.com/)

medium

hidden content

An Organization schema block (schema.org/Organization) is rendered with display:none, containing Admitad's full company profile including name, logo, description, founding date, founder, and official URL. This hidden structured data is invisible to users but readable by bots, AI agents, and search crawlers, and is used to falsely assert organizational identity for the artfut.com domain. (location: page.html lines 144-155: <div itemscope itemtype='https://schema.org/Organization' style='display: none;'>)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/artfut.com

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is artfut.com safe for AI agents to use?

artfut.com currently scores 41/100 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.