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-55.co.uk' impersonates AWS (Amazon Web Services) DNS infrastructure by mimicking the 'awsdns' naming convention used by Route 53 (e.g., ns-xxx.awsdns-xx.com). The .co.uk TLD combined with a numeric suffix pattern is designed to appear as a legitimate AWS DNS server to users and automated systems. (location: domain: awsdns-55.co.uk)
phishing
The domain closely mimics AWS Route 53 DNS nameserver naming conventions, likely used to deceive users or automated systems into trusting it as an official Amazon/AWS resource. Combined with TLS failure (no valid certificate), the site is non-functional as a legitimate service but consistent with a parked phishing or credential harvesting domain. (location: domain: awsdns-55.co.uk)
credential harvesting
TLS is not connected and certificate is invalid (connected=false, cert_valid=false), meaning the site cannot serve HTTPS content securely. This pattern is common in dormant credential harvesting infrastructure awaiting activation or recently taken down after a campaign. (location: metadata.json: tls fields)
malicious redirect
The domain appears to be non-serving (empty page.html and page-text.txt) with invalid TLS. This is consistent with a redirect-only or DNS-manipulation domain, where the value is in the DNS record itself rather than hosted content — a technique used for malicious DNS redirects or traffic interception impersonating AWS DNS infrastructure. (location: domain: awsdns-55.co.uk; page.html: empty; tls: connected=false)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/awsdns-55.co.ukCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
awsdns-55.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.