context safety score
A score of 32/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.
encoded payload
suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content
malicious redirect
script/meta redirect patterns detected in page source
cloaking
Page conditionally redirects based on referrer or user-agent
js obfuscation
JavaScript uses Function constructor for runtime code generation
prompt injection
Hidden HTML element contains AI-targeting instructions
obfuscated code
ZoomInfo integration script uses multi-layer obfuscation: atob() base64 decoding combined with character-shift arithmetic loops to hide the property key set on the window object and the script source URL. This pattern is used to evade static analysis of third-party script behavior. (location: page.html line 399, inside <!--zoominfo--> comment block)
hidden content
A dns-prefetch link targets the domain 'sasndfsdfghjasd.run' — a randomly-named domain under the .run TLD with no apparent legitimate association to benchmarkemail.com. This could be used for covert DNS-based data exfiltration or as a tracking beacon, and its obfuscated name is a strong indicator of malicious or unauthorized third-party inclusion. (location: page.html line 110: <link rel='dns-prefetch' href='//sasndfsdfghjasd.run' />)
obfuscated code
Facebook Pixel initialization uses an unsubstituted template literal '{577676562409309}' (with literal curly braces) as the pixel ID, rather than a real numeric ID. This indicates either a misconfigured tracking script copied from a phishing template, or an intentional placeholder to avoid detection while still firing the pixel endpoint. (location: page.html lines 353 and 422-423: fbq('init', '{577676562409309}') and noscript img src with same bracketed ID)
malicious redirect
Login links for both the new platform (app.benchmarkemail.io/login) and classic platform (ui.benchmarkemail.com/login) use plain HTTP rather than HTTPS, exposing credentials entered after clicking these links to potential interception via downgrade attacks. (location: page.html lines 506 and 518: href='http://app.benchmarkemail.io/login' and href='http://ui.benchmarkemail.com/login')
hidden content
The Trackdesk script dynamically rewrites all anchor href values for links pointing to app.benchmarkemail.io/register by appending a 'cid' parameter read from a cookie. Combined with the Attribution app script that similarly rewrites cross-domain links to inject 'ajs_aid' anonymous tracking IDs, all outbound registration and cross-domain links are silently modified in the browser DOM without user awareness. (location: page.html lines 54-79 (Trackdesk link rewriter) and page-text.txt lines 1696-1731 (Attribution cross-domain link rewriter))
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/benchmarkemail.comCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
benchmarkemail.com 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.
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.