context safety score
A score of 75/100 indicates minor risk signals were detected. The entity may be legitimate but has characteristics that warrant attention.
malicious redirect
A carousel banner item links to 'http://drdm.es?sE0k1', an unrelated third-party domain with an obfuscated query parameter, embedded within the official CCT Murcia site content. This suspicious off-domain URL does not match any known affiliated domain and uses a short-code style parameter typical of redirect tracking or malicious link injection. (location: page.html:335)
credential harvesting
Three login forms collect EMAIL/DNI and password credentials and POST to '/es/mi_perfil'. While the forms appear to belong to the legitimate site, the presence of three separate credential forms (mobile modal, desktop dropdown, and session-expired modal) increases the attack surface. The password field has a maxlength of 10 which is unusually restrictive and atypical of secure modern authentication. (location: page.html:142,191,1111)
hidden content
Multiple elements use 'd-none' CSS class to hide content from users, including a link labeled 'ACCEDER A CCT ONLINE' and an icon element inside the login modal. While Bootstrap utility classes for responsive hiding are common, the hidden link inside the modal body warrants note as it is invisible to end users but present in the DOM. (location: page.html:139,140)
hidden content
Three duplicate Facebook Pixel tracking scripts are loaded with three different pixel IDs (4287982628116204, 3154049024901977, 1308450883043298), all tracking PageView events. This level of redundant cross-site tracking via multiple pixel IDs on a single page is unusual and may indicate third-party data harvesting beyond normal analytics use. (location: page.html:49-62,79-93,114-130)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/cctmurcia.esCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
cctmurcia.es currently scores 75/100 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.