context safety score
A score of 57/100 indicates minor risk signals were detected. The entity may be legitimate but has characteristics that warrant attention.
phishing
1 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host
brand impersonation
The page is hosted on cece-caramel.hydr0.org but fully impersonates mp3.cc: the title, canonical URL, all navigation links, logo, footer copyright, and contact email (hydrofm@yandex.com) all reference mp3.cc. The site clones mp3.cc's interface to present a deceptive mirror under an unrelated domain. (location: page.html:5,9,11,14,18,33,59,609,614)
malicious redirect
All audio playback URLs are routed through a third-party proxy domain (fine.sunproxy.net) via base64-encoded path parameters in data-url attributes. Audio requests are intercepted and served through this intermediary rather than directly from mp3.cc, enabling traffic interception, substitution, or tracking. (location: page.html:228,247,266,285,304,323,342,361,380,399,418,437,456,475,494,513,532,551,570,589)
malicious redirect
The canonical link tag redirects crawlers and agents to mp3.cc/t/1575052510-cece-caramel/ while the actual serving domain is hydr0.org, contributing to the 1 redirect flagged in Tier 2 pre-scan. This misdirects automated agents about the true origin of the page. (location: page.html:9)
social engineering
An 'Online Radio' sidebar link points to looz.net (target=_blank) styled identically to the legitimate mp3.cc genre navigation links, potentially misleading users into clicking an off-brand external site embedded within the cloned mp3.cc interface. (location: page.html:204-215)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/cece-caramel.hydr0.orgCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
cece-caramel.hydr0.org currently scores 57/100 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.