Is dns-shop.ru safe?

suspiciousmedium confidence
49/100

context safety score

A score of 49/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
95
behavior
80
content
27
graph
30

6 threat patterns detected

medium

malicious redirect

script/meta redirect patterns detected in page source

high

cloaking

Page conditionally redirects based on referrer or user-agent

medium

hidden content

The page body is completely empty with no visible content (page-text.txt is blank, <body> tag is empty). The page renders nothing to users while executing JavaScript logic. This is consistent with a bot-check interstitial or cloaking technique where real content is withheld pending client-side validation. (location: page.html:<body> (line 150-152))

high

malicious redirect

The qauth validation success callback (qauth_handle_validate_success) performs an unconditional window.location.replace() redirect after a configurable timeout (window.qauth_reload_after, default 10ms). The redirect appends UTM tracking parameters including utm_referrer containing the full document.referrer URL, then replaces the current location. This harvests referrer data and silently redirects users. The external script /__qrator/qauth_utm_v2d_v9118.js controls the trigger for this redirect. (location: page.html:135-145)

high

hidden content

Core page logic is offloaded to an external script loaded from /__qrator/qauth_utm_v2d_v9118.js. This script is not present in the scanned assets and its behavior is unauditable. The qrator path prefix is associated with Qrator DDoS protection services but can also be used to deliver arbitrary JavaScript payloads to passing clients. The script controls the qauth_handle_validate_success callback, qauth_reload_after timing, and qauth_referrer_maxlen parameters. (location: page.html:7 (<script src="/__qrator/qauth_utm_v2d_v9118.js">))

low

social engineering

The meta tag 'referrer: no-referrer' is set, suppressing the Referer header on outbound requests from this page. Combined with the active referrer harvesting via utm_referrer query parameter injection, the page collects inbound referrer data while preventing downstream sites from seeing dns-shop.ru as the source, obscuring the traffic chain. (location: page.html:5 and page.html:7 (<meta name="referrer" content="no-referrer">))

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/dns-shop.ru

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is dns-shop.ru safe for AI agents to use?

dns-shop.ru 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.

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.