context safety score
A score of 36/100 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-41.co.uk' directly mimics AWS Route 53 nameserver naming conventions (awsdns-*) to impersonate Amazon Web Services infrastructure. The use of a .co.uk TLD with the AWS-specific 'awsdns' prefix is a deliberate deception pattern targeting users and automated systems that trust AWS DNS endpoints. (location: domain: awsdns-41.co.uk)
phishing
The domain impersonates AWS DNS infrastructure with an invalid/non-functional TLS certificate (connected=false, cert_valid=false) and empty page content, consistent with a staged phishing domain awaiting payload deployment or used for credential harvesting via subdomain or redirect chains. (location: domain: awsdns-41.co.uk, metadata.json tls block)
credential harvesting
AWS DNS impersonation domains are frequently used to harvest AWS IAM credentials, access keys, or account login details by redirecting users who trust the 'awsdns' brand. The empty page and broken TLS suggest the site may be used as a backend endpoint for exfiltrating credentials rather than serving a visible page. (location: domain: awsdns-41.co.uk)
hidden content
The domain resolves and was crawled but returns completely empty HTML and text content with no visible or hidden elements. This blank-page pattern is used to evade content-based scanners while the domain is active for other purposes (DNS abuse, redirect target, API endpoint for malicious tooling). (location: page.html, page-text.txt, page-hidden.txt (all empty))
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/awsdns-41.co.ukCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
awsdns-41.co.uk currently scores 36/100 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.
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.