Is costa-del-mar-radio.updatestar.com safe?

cautionmedium confidence
72/100

context safety score

A score of 72/100 indicates minor risk signals were detected. The entity may be legitimate but has characteristics that warrant attention.

identity
100
behavior
80
content
55
graph
81

6 threat patterns detected

high

phishing

1 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host

low

social engineering

The page prominently displays 'All free downloads. Original files only. Virus checked and safe.' and 'Safe to install' badge alongside a download button for a third-party iOS app, using trust-building language to encourage users to download software via a platform that acts as a download aggregator rather than the official publisher. The page is not the official app source (App Store or publisher site), creating a false sense of endorsement and safety. (location: page.html:206, page.html:300)

low

social engineering

The newsletter signup form uses a honeypot anti-bot field named 'bot' for the visible email input, while the actual email is collected in a hidden field named 'email' with class 'street'. Additionally, a JavaScript XOR operation computes a 'url' field value at runtime (w.value ^ 1858356823), obfuscating form submission data from static analysis. This pattern, while potentially a CSRF/bot-mitigation technique, conceals the true data being submitted and could be misused for covert data collection. (location: page.html:841-858, page.html:1055-1074)

low

hidden content

Newsletter forms contain hidden/CSS-hidden input fields (class 'street', which is a common pattern to hide honeypot or tracking fields from view): 'email' (text field collecting email separately from the visible 'bot' field), 'web' (pre-seeded value 1287701551), and 'url' (computed via XOR at runtime). The 'tsh' field contains a base64-encoded value 'FbfFBO2I/F/6+iGEFwu4sg==' submitted as a hidden token. These hidden fields are present in both the sidebar and footer newsletter forms. (location: page.html:847-852, page.html:1062-1067)

low

hidden content

The flagged suspicious base64 blob is the value of the hidden 'tsh' input field: 'FbfFBO2I/F/6+iGEFwu4sg=='. This is a 16-byte base64-encoded value submitted with newsletter forms. While consistent with a HMAC/timestamp signature for bot mitigation, it is opaque and cannot be verified as benign without server-side context. (location: page.html:852, page.html:1067)

low

social engineering

The page references an external URL in its visible content ('https://www.costadelmar-radio.com') as the official website for the Costa Del Mar Radio application, while the hosting domain is 'costa-del-mar-radio.updatestar.com'. The displayed URL is rendered as plain italic text (not a hyperlink), which is the deceptive link flagged by the pre-scan. Users or agents parsing this as the authoritative source may be misled about the relationship between the aggregator site and the real publisher site. (location: page.html:382, page-text.txt:216)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/costa-del-mar-radio.updatestar.com

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is costa-del-mar-radio.updatestar.com safe for AI agents to use?

costa-del-mar-radio.updatestar.com currently scores 72/100 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.

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 25, 2026

Verdict Scale

safe80–100
caution50–79
suspicious20–49
dangerous0–19

Trust Graph

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.