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
phishing
Domain axonixgrid.com is only 34 days old with TLS completely non-functional (connected=false, cert_valid=false). Newly registered domains with broken/absent TLS are a strong indicator of a phishing or malicious site that has not yet fully deployed its infrastructure, or is serving content over HTTP to avoid certificate scrutiny. (location: metadata.json: domain_age_days=34, tls.connected=false, tls.cert_valid=false)
phishing
The page returned empty HTML and no visible text content, yet the domain is live and registered. Empty or blank pages on new domains are commonly used as placeholder phishing pages, cloaked pages that serve different content based on user-agent/referrer (e.g., serving malicious content to real victims but blank content to scanners), or staging infrastructure for future attacks. (location: page.html (empty), page-text.txt (empty), page-hidden.txt (empty))
malicious redirect
A 34-day-old domain with no TLS, no visible content, and unknown hosting reputation is consistent with a redirect hop or cloaked landing page used in redirect chains. The absence of any content combined with a live registered domain suggests the page may conditionally redirect targets while appearing empty to automated scanners. (location: metadata.json: hosting.reputation=Unknown, tls.connected=false; page.html (empty))
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/axonixgrid.comCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
axonixgrid.com 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.