context safety score
A score of 67/100 indicates minor risk signals were detected. The entity may be legitimate but has characteristics that warrant attention.
phishing
20 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host
exfiltration
JavaScript intercepts form submissions to exfiltrate data
hidden content
The page exposes a base64-encoded Google Maps API key in plaintext JavaScript: var ssf_api_key='QUl6YVN5QlpyRVNNMlRpTUkzOWRJajNFRG82eVFPTVFmNjBuVUR3' which decodes to a valid Google Maps API key (AIzaSyBZrESM2TiMI39dIj3EDo6yQOMQf60nUDw). While not hidden from users, the base64 encoding is a weak attempt to obscure the key from automated scanners. Exposed API keys can be abused for quota theft or unauthorized usage. (location: page.html:313)
malicious redirect
The scanned URL is azvi.es (bare domain) but all content and canonical URLs reference www.azvi.es — this is a standard www redirect and consistent with legitimate site behavior. The one redirect flagged by Tier 2 heuristics is this bare-to-www domain redirect, not a malicious redirect to an unrelated host. (location: metadata.json, page.html:175)
hidden content
Numerous CSS display:none rules hide UI elements (store locator fields, email fields, navigation elements, cookie modal panels). These are all consistent with standard WordPress/plugin UI customization and do not conceal malicious or deceptive content. The hidden content ratio of 0.01 is very low and matches benign plugin behavior. (location: page.html:340-441, 513-760)
hidden content
12 suspicious base64 blobs flagged by Tier 2 are all standard lazy-load placeholder images (1x1 transparent GIFs and small blank PNG placeholders) embedded as data URIs to prevent layout shift during lazy loading. None contain executable payloads or injected content. (location: page.html:818, 908, 1402, 1508, 1585, 2307-2372, 2990, 3343)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/azvi.esCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
azvi.es currently scores 67/100 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.
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.