context safety score
A score of 48/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.
tls connection failed
Could not establish TLS connection
brand impersonation
Domain 'awsdns-13.co.uk' mimics AWS (Amazon Web Services) DNS infrastructure naming conventions. The pattern 'awsdns-' is used by legitimate AWS Route 53 nameservers (e.g., awsdns-13.net), but this domain uses a .co.uk TLD instead, creating a convincing impersonation likely intended to deceive users or automated systems into trusting it as an official AWS resource. (location: domain: awsdns-13.co.uk)
phishing
The domain closely resembles official AWS DNS nameserver hostnames (e.g., ns-1.awsdns-13.net). Combined with a failed TLS connection and no verifiable certificate, the domain may be used in phishing campaigns targeting AWS customers or systems that interact with AWS infrastructure. (location: domain: awsdns-13.co.uk, metadata.json tls.connected=false)
malicious redirect
The site fails TLS connection (connected=false, cert_valid=false) and returns empty page content, which is consistent with a domain parked or configured for backend redirection, credential interception, or DNS-based attacks rather than serving legitimate content. (location: metadata.json: tls.connected=false, cert_valid=false; page.html: empty)
hidden content
The page.html and page-text.txt are completely empty despite the domain being reachable enough for metadata collection. This anomaly — a domain with no served content — may indicate the site operates covertly (e.g., serving content only to targeted users, bots, or under specific conditions) to evade scanning and analysis. (location: page.html: empty, page-text.txt: empty, page-hidden.txt: empty)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/awsdns-13.co.ukCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
awsdns-13.co.uk currently scores 48/100 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.
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.