Is dimionline.com safe?

suspiciousmedium confidence
46/100

context safety score

A score of 46/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
100
behavior
80
content
17
graph
30

7 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

high

js obfuscation

JavaScript uses Function constructor for runtime code generation

high

credential harvesting

Login form at dimionline.com collects GR Number and Password fields and submits via POST to /Account/login_Click. The form also silently collects geolocation data (latitude/longitude) via navigator.geolocation.getCurrentPosition and appends them as hidden fields to every login submission, harvesting precise physical location alongside credentials without user disclosure or consent notice. (location: page.html:268,273,278,286,287,318,338)

medium

hidden content

Two hidden input fields (id='Longitude', id='Latitude') are present in the login form. These are populated silently by JavaScript geolocation tracking and submitted with the login POST, making location data collection invisible to the user. (location: page.html:286-287)

low

hidden content

A 1x1 pixel Facebook tracking pixel image is embedded with display:none, used to silently beacon user visits to Facebook (pixel ID 1910399325867700) without a visible cookie/tracking consent notice. (location: page.html:238-240)

medium

social engineering

The page title is simply 'ESS' and the page presents itself as an internal HR Employee Self-Service portal for an organization affiliated with Dawateislami (Islamic organization). This framing creates implicit trust pressure on employees to enter credentials into what may be a third-party or unaffiliated domain (dimionline.com), potentially deceiving users about the true operator of the credential-collecting system. (location: page.html:8,258-262)

medium

credential harvesting

Google Maps API is loaded over plain HTTP (not HTTPS) from maps.googleapis.com with an embedded API key (AIzaSyBjEn_V4JG6vs0gHTPRs0oESFG0K4gVLCg) exposed in client-side code. Loading over HTTP allows potential MITM interception and the exposed API key could be abused by third parties. (location: page.html:342)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/dimionline.com

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is dimionline.com safe for AI agents to use?

dimionline.com currently scores 46/100 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.

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.