context safety score
A score of 36/100 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
brand impersonation
The domain blogspot.it is serving a page that fully impersonates Google's CAPTCHA/reCAPTCHA challenge page. The page title is 'https://www.google.com/', it displays Google branding and messaging ('Our systems have detected unusual traffic...'), and mimics the exact appearance of a legitimate Google interstitial. This is not hosted on Google infrastructure — it is hosted on blogspot.it, an Italian domain with no affiliation to Google. (location: page.html:3-34, metadata.json (domain: blogspot.it))
phishing
The page impersonates a Google security checkpoint to deceive users into believing they are interacting with Google. The form submits to 'index' (a relative path on blogspot.it) via POST, not to any Google endpoint. The 'continue' hidden field value points to https://www.google.com/ to create the illusion of a legitimate Google flow, while the actual form submission is captured by the attacker's server. (location: page.html:7,17)
malicious redirect
A hidden form field named 'continue' with value 'https://www.google.com/' is used to redirect users after form submission, creating the false impression that completing the CAPTCHA returns them to Google. The actual POST target is 'index' on blogspot.it, allowing the attacker to intercept the submission and then redirect to Google to avoid suspicion. (location: page.html:17)
prompt injection
The page uses a Google reCAPTCHA Enterprise site key (6LfwuyUTAAAAAOAmoS0fdqijC2PbbdH4kjq62Y1b) along with a large opaque data-s token and a hidden 'q' parameter containing an encoded/obfuscated value. These tokens may be used to pass manipulated or forged challenge tokens to downstream AI or automated systems that process CAPTCHA responses, potentially bypassing or poisoning agent-based verification pipelines. (location: page.html:15,17)
social engineering
The page employs authoritative language mimicking Google's security systems ('Our systems have detected unusual traffic from your computer network') and displays the visitor's real IP address and timestamp to create a sense of legitimacy and urgency. This is a classic social engineering technique to pressure users into complying with the fake CAPTCHA challenge. (location: page.html:24,30)
obfuscated code
The hidden form field 'q' contains a long base64-like encoded string value ('EhAmABkAAAAtBAAAAAAAAA4BGP7foM0GIil7OHKliTD4...') whose purpose is opaque. Combined with the large encoded 'data-s' attribute on the reCAPTCHA div, these encoded payloads obscure the true data being exfiltrated or submitted when the user completes the fake CAPTCHA. (location: page.html:15,17)
hidden content
An 'infoDiv' element is hidden by default (style='display:none') and only revealed on user interaction. While this pattern exists on real Google pages, in this impersonation context it is used to reinforce the deception with additional Google-branded explanatory text, making the fake page more convincing and harder to identify as fraudulent. (location: page.html:26-28)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/blogspot.itCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
blogspot.it currently scores 36/100 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.