Is atl-j-fitzpleasure.muzce.com safe?

suspiciousmedium confidence
47/100

context safety score

A score of 47/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
50
behavior
80
content
34
graph
62

6 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

high

phishing

1 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host

medium

social engineering

The site promotes 'free and without registration' MP3 downloads of copyrighted music (Alt-J 'Fitzpleasure' and others), which is a classic lure to attract users to a piracy site. The domain atl-j-fitzpleasure.muzce.com is a keyword-stuffed subdomain designed to intercept search traffic for a specific song/artist. While not directly malicious, this pattern is commonly used as a vector to expose users to ad fraud, malvertising, and unwanted software. (location: page.html:182-184, metadata.json (domain))

medium

malicious redirect

A third-party script is loaded from muzce.39o.ru — a subdomain of 39o.ru which is entirely separate from the main muzce.com domain. This external script (muzce.yan) is loaded with parameters including 'u=eZWL&pt1=muzce.com&pt2=510&pt3=php'. The use of an unrelated second domain (39o.ru) to serve a script labelled as Yandex RTB is suspicious and could be used for tracking, ad injection, or redirects outside the operator's control. (location: page.html:1514)

low

hidden content

A 1x1 pixel transparent GIF is embedded as a base64 data URI in the LiveInternet tracking image (src=''). A JavaScript function then replaces this src with a live tracking beacon to counter.yadro.ru, exfiltrating the page URL, referrer, title, and screen dimensions. This is a standard LiveInternet analytics pattern but constitutes passive user data exfiltration without prominent disclosure. (location: page.html:1500-1506)

low

social engineering

The Tier 2 scan flagged one deceptive link. Reviewing the HTML, the footer contains a link styled with 'display:inline-block;margin: 0 20px;' pointing to '//atl-j-fitzpleasure.muzce.com/info.html' — a protocol-relative URL. While the destination is on the same effective domain, protocol-relative links can be abused in mixed-content or MITM scenarios. The context ('Информация для пользователей' / 'User information') is vague and could mislead users about the nature of the destination. (location: page.html:1494)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/atl-j-fitzpleasure.muzce.com

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is atl-j-fitzpleasure.muzce.com safe for AI agents to use?

atl-j-fitzpleasure.muzce.com currently scores 47/100 with a suspicious 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

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.