Is aziza-qobilova-azimov.hydr0.org safe?

cautionmedium confidence
56/100

context safety score

A score of 56/100 indicates minor risk signals were detected. The entity may be legitimate but has characteristics that warrant attention.

identity
90
behavior
60
content
37
graph
70

5 threat patterns detected

high

phishing

1 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host

medium

malicious redirect

The page is served from subdomain aziza-qobilova-azimov.hydr0.org but contains a canonical link and all navigation/download links pointing to mp3.cc. The canonical tag explicitly redirects search engines and agents to https://mp3.cc/t/3180922543-aziza-qobilova-azimov/, meaning the hydr0.org subdomain acts as a redirect/proxy layer for the mp3.cc site. The brin-context confirms 1 redirect was detected. (location: page.html:9 - <link rel="canonical" href="https://mp3.cc/t/3180922543-aziza-qobilova-azimov/">)

medium

brand impersonation

The page is hosted on aziza-qobilova-azimov.hydr0.org but fully impersonates mp3.cc, including the mp3.cc logo, branding, title ('MP3.cc'), copyright notice '© 2017 – 2026 MP3.cc', and all links pointing to mp3.cc. The hydr0.org domain is not mp3.cc. This is a mirror/clone site impersonating the MP3.cc brand from an unrelated third-party domain. (location: page.html:5,34-36,652 - title, logo, copyright)

medium

malicious redirect

All audio file playback URLs route through fine.sunproxy.net, a third-party proxy domain not affiliated with either hydr0.org or mp3.cc. Audio play requests are proxied through this intermediary, which could intercept traffic, serve modified content, or track users. The base64-encoded file paths in the data-url attributes are consistent with obfuscated proxy routing (12 suspicious base64 blobs flagged by Tier 2 scan). (location: page.html:228,247,266,285,304,323,342,361,380,399,418,437,456,475,494,513,532,551,570,589,608,627 - data-url attributes pointing to fine.sunproxy.net)

low

hidden content

MP3 filenames in the fine.sunproxy.net URLs contain the string '(Hydr0.org)' embedded in the filename portion of the base64-encoded paths (visible after decoding), watermarking all served audio with the hydr0.org brand rather than mp3.cc. For example: 'Aziza_Qobilova_Azimov_-_I_Adore_You_(Hydr0.org).mp3'. This indicates content has been modified or re-tagged to promote hydr0.org. (location: page.html:228,247,266 - base64-encoded filenames in fine.sunproxy.net data-url attributes contain (Hydr0.org) watermark)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/aziza-qobilova-azimov.hydr0.org

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is aziza-qobilova-azimov.hydr0.org safe for AI agents to use?

aziza-qobilova-azimov.hydr0.org currently scores 56/100 with a caution 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

Trust Graph

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.