context safety score
A score of 49/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.
encoded payload
suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content
obfuscated code
Two large obfuscated JavaScript blocks using _0x3c1f() and _0x28d6() variable-name mangling with base64 string arrays, shuffled array anti-tamper loops, and decodeURIComponent decoding. The obfuscation pattern (hex-offset string table, self-modifying shuffle, custom base64 decoder) is consistent with tools like javascript-obfuscator used to hide ad-fraud, pop-under injection, or tracking behaviour from static analysis. (location: page.html lines 1301-1303 and 1305-1307 (<script> blocks at bottom of body))
malicious redirect
A navigation link labeled '18 & Abused' points to https://trustberrie.com/zn/1f0cb147-a2f1-6a74-8dac-836e86850d14 — a third-party tracker/redirect domain (trustberrie.com) with a UUID path, not a destination URL. The same pattern appears in the sidemenu (trustberrie.com/zn/1f0cb14b-...). trustberrie.com is an affiliate-redirect broker; clicking sends the user through an opaque tracking chain to an unknown adult or exploit destination. (location: page.html line 102 (nav anchor) and line 1208 (sidemenu anchor))
malicious redirect
Three footer ad banners are injected via JavaScript by writing iframes whose src resolves to https://cum.org/bnr?r=1|2|3&... . cum.org is a third-party ad-network domain; the ad content is loaded dynamically and entirely outside the host page's control, enabling drive-by redirects or malvertising payloads served from that network. (location: page.html lines 1039-1061 (footer ad injection scripts); also visible in page-text.txt lines 961-981)
hidden content
An HTML comment block (lines 1065-1092) contains commented-out iframe code pointing to https://engine.camconnections.live/ with sandbox attributes including 'allow-popups allow-forms'. A second comment block (lines 1094-1124) contains JavaScript that would dynamically swap the '18 & Abused' nav link href via Math.random() between two go.crazyshitlive.com/xlirdr.com redirect URLs, and also conditionally inject Chaturbate or xlirdr.com iframes into the page footer. While currently commented out, this represents a ready-to-activate hidden redirect/injection mechanism. (location: page.html lines 1065-1124 (HTML comment blocks))
social engineering
The meta tag 'referrer: unsafe-url' (page.html line 29) causes the full URL (including any query parameters that could contain session tokens or user-identifiable data) to be sent as the Referer header to every third-party resource (ad networks, affiliate trackers, external CDNs). This leaks user context to all outbound parties. (location: page.html line 29 (<meta name='referrer' content='unsafe-url'>))
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/crazyshit.comCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
crazyshit.com currently scores 49/100 with a suspicious 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.