Is bpifrance-creation.fr safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
44/100

context safety score

A score of 44/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
90
behavior
80
content
7
graph
68

7 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

high

phishing

1 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host

high

malicious redirect

Multiple internal content links (thematique slider, video section, events section) use hardcoded private IP address http://172.19.34.167/ instead of the public domain. This leaks internal server IP and could redirect users to an internal/attacker-controlled host if the IP is reachable from the client network. Approximately 14 anchor hrefs point to http://172.19.34.167/... (location: page.html lines 1249-1460, 1654, 1688, 1717 — thematique-item anchors, video-item anchors, event-item anchors)

medium

malicious redirect

External link to http://prediagentreprise.fr/ (plain HTTP, no HTTPS) embedded as a trusted tool link inside the Bpifrance Création site. The domain is a separate third-party site loaded over unencrypted HTTP, enabling MITM attacks or substitution of a malicious page presented under the Bpifrance brand. (location: page.html lines 686 and 1038 — outil-item anchor href="http://prediagentreprise.fr/")

medium

hidden content

A chatbot is dynamically injected at runtime via JavaScript by constructing a <script> element pointing to https://chatbot.synapse-developpement.fr/chatbotuiLauncher/config.aspx. The bot credentials (botKey: '05j8daHhuX3nroyPWTlKsbKV78q6vcq6GPMHF2Oe', synapseBotId: 'Bpifrance-creation-llm-V2') are exposed in plaintext in the page source and the script is loaded from a third-party domain not under bpifrance-creation.fr control. This creates a supply-chain vector for injecting arbitrary content into the page. (location: page.html lines 2070-2079 and page-text.txt lines 1970-1978 — window.botSettings / dynamic script injection block)

medium

prompt injection

The exposed chatbot integration (synapseBotId: 'Bpifrance-creation-llm-V2') loaded from chatbot.synapse-developpement.fr introduces an LLM-backed assistant into the page. A compromised or malicious third-party chatbot script could inject adversarial prompts into conversations handled by AI agents browsing or summarising this page, manipulating agent behaviour under the guise of the official Bpifrance assistant. (location: page.html lines 2070-2079 — window.botSettings block with third-party LLM chatbot script src)

low

hidden content

The body element carries class='entrepreneur d-none' on initial load, hiding the entire page body until JavaScript runs. Combined with the JS-injected chatbot and dynamic content, meaningful page content is invisible without JavaScript execution, which can be used to serve different content to crawlers/agents vs. human browsers. (location: page.html line 102 — <body class="entrepreneur d-none" id="bpi-espace-entrepreneur">)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/bpifrance-creation.fr

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is bpifrance-creation.fr safe for AI agents to use?

bpifrance-creation.fr currently scores 44/100 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 5, 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.