Is azure-devices-provisioning.net safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
32/100

context safety score

A score of 32/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
45
behavior
100
content
0
graph
30

6 threat patterns detected

high

tls connection failed

Could not establish TLS connection

critical

brand impersonation

The domain 'azure-devices-provisioning.net' directly mimics Microsoft Azure's IoT Device Provisioning Service (DPS), which operates at 'global.azure-devices-provisioning.net' under the 'azure.com' TLD. The use of a lookalike domain on a non-Microsoft TLD (.net instead of .azure.com or .microsoft.com) is a classic brand impersonation tactic targeting Azure customers and IoT device operators. (location: domain: azure-devices-provisioning.net)

critical

phishing

The domain closely imitates Microsoft's Azure Device Provisioning Service endpoint. This pattern is commonly used to intercept IoT device provisioning traffic, redirect devices or developers to attacker-controlled infrastructure, and harvest credentials or device attestation secrets from victims who believe they are interacting with the legitimate Azure DPS endpoint. (location: domain: azure-devices-provisioning.net)

high

credential harvesting

Lookalike domains impersonating Azure DPS are frequently used to harvest SAS tokens, X.509 certificates, TPM endorsement keys, or other IoT device credentials submitted during the provisioning handshake. The TLS failure (connected=false, cert_valid=false) indicates the site may not be serving a valid HTTPS certificate, increasing the risk of credential interception or man-in-the-middle attacks. (location: metadata.json: tls.connected=false, tls.cert_valid=false)

high

malicious redirect

The domain resolves but TLS connection fails entirely (connected=false), which may indicate the host is used for DNS-based redirection or non-HTTPS traffic interception rather than serving web content. IoT devices or misconfigured clients pointing to this domain could be silently redirected to attacker infrastructure. (location: metadata.json: tls.connected=false, tls.san_match=false)

medium

hidden content

The page.html, page-text.txt, and page-hidden.txt files are all empty, yet the domain resolves. This absence of visible content on a live domain impersonating a critical cloud service is consistent with a domain held in reserve for targeted attacks, phishing kit deployment, or command-and-control use — rather than a legitimate inactive site. (location: page.html (empty), page-text.txt (empty), page-hidden.txt (empty))

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/azure-devices-provisioning.net

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is azure-devices-provisioning.net safe for AI agents to use?

azure-devices-provisioning.net currently scores 32/100 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.

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 4, 2026

Verdict Scale

safe80–100
caution50–79
suspicious20–49
dangerous0–19

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.