Is cloudfilter.net safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
43/100

context safety score

A score of 43/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
100
behavior
55
content
17
graph
30

6 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

high

cloaking

Page loads content in transparent or zero-size iframe overlay

high

brand impersonation

The domain cloudfilter.net is serving content that fully impersonates Cloudmark (a Proofpoint brand). The page presents itself as the official Cloudmark website, using Proofpoint/Cloudmark branding, logos, favicons, navigation, and product listings. The canonical URL and og:url both point to www.cloudmark.com, while the actual serving domain is cloudfilter.net — a different, unrelated domain masquerading as the legitimate Cloudmark site. (location: page.html lines 16-17, 40-44; metadata.json domain field)

high

malicious redirect

The page sets canonical and og:url tags to https://www.cloudmark.com/en while being served from cloudfilter.net. This is a domain misdirection pattern: users visiting cloudfilter.net are presented with content designed to appear as if they are on the legitimate cloudmark.com domain, while actually remaining on the attacker-controlled cloudfilter.net domain. (location: page.html lines 16-17, 42)

medium

hidden content

A Pardot marketing tracker script is injected inside a div with class 'element-invisible' and inline style 'clear:both', effectively hiding it from visual rendering. The script dynamically loads https://pi.pardot.com/pd.js and sets account IDs (piAId='149101', piCId='1093'), enabling covert visitor tracking without user awareness. (location: page.html lines 1050-1063)

low

hidden content

Multiple inline <style> blocks are rendered as visible text content in page-text.txt (lines 99-539), indicating CSS was injected into content areas rather than proper style tags. This causes raw CSS rules to be exposed in the text layer, which could be used to confuse text-based parsers or AI agents processing the page content. (location: page-text.txt lines 99-539)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/cloudfilter.net

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is cloudfilter.net safe for AI agents to use?

cloudfilter.net currently scores 43/100 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 4, 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.