context safety score
A score of 37/100 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
phishing
1 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host
cloaking
Page loads content in transparent or zero-size iframe overlay
obfuscated code
Script block with id 'mng_admiral_script' uses multiple layers of double-encoded URI obfuscation (decodeURI(decodeURI(...))) to conceal variable names and dynamically injects an external script from the unrelated domain 'thebestpaints.com'. The injected file 'https://thebestpaints.com/bundles/h4uartdgkh_3i.js' has no legitimate relationship to the news site and is consistent with a compromised ad/script supply-chain injection or malvertising payload. (location: page.html:17 — <script id='mng_admiral_script'>)
obfuscated code
A second obfuscated block within 'mng_admiral_script' decodes the string 'googletag' and a complex localStorage key via chained double decodeURI calls, then reads from localStorage and calls setTargeting to exfiltrate session data to Google Ad Manager. The deliberate obfuscation of standard API names (googletag, getItem) is designed to evade static analysis and obscure data harvesting behavior. (location: page.html:18 — <script id='mng_admiral_script'> (second IIFE))
malicious redirect
Two trending-bar article links display benign visible labels ('Iran news', 'Immigration news') but their URL slugs explicitly contain the word 'redirect' (/2026/02/01/iran-redirect/ and /2025/03/01/immigration-news-redirect/). This slug naming is anomalous for an editorial CMS and suggests these URLs may function as redirect stubs pointing to off-site destinations rather than genuine articles. (location: page.html:541-563 — trending bar <ul> links)
hidden content
The page sets 'meta name=robots content=noarchive', preventing search engines and archiving services from caching the page. While individually innocuous, this combined with other anomalies limits forensic visibility into ephemeral or rotating malicious content served to users. (location: page.html:5 — <meta name='robots' content='noarchive'>)
credential harvesting
The inline JavaScript configuration exposes the Auth0 client_id ('sUDTpFK4Hvy5e2WqyZCGwtl5AjoyK226') and a plaintext entitlements API key ('DHL8Vs1UNo9u0WO52dVBzSuLi4kw2so25cXK1fy7') in the public page source. These credentials could be harvested by any party reading the page and used to probe or abuse the authentication and entitlements endpoints. (location: page.html:115-120 — digisubs_settings-js-extra and connext_utils-js-extra inline script blocks)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/dailynews.comCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
dailynews.com currently scores 37/100 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.
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.