Is era-intro.hydr0.org safe?

cautionmedium confidence
51/100

context safety score

A score of 51/100 indicates minor risk signals were detected. The entity may be legitimate but has characteristics that warrant attention.

identity
100
behavior
60
content
24
graph
71

6 threat patterns detected

high

phishing

2 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host

high

brand impersonation

The page is served from era-intro.hydr0.org but presents itself entirely as MP3.cc: the page title reads 'Era Intro | Download mp3 free, listen music online - MP3.cc', the logo and branding say MP3.cc, and the canonical URL and og:url both point to https://mp3.cc/t/2162950159-era-intro/. CSS and JS are hotlinked directly from mp3.cc. The hydr0.org operator mirrors MP3.cc content under their own domain, deceiving users and search engines about the true origin of the site. (location: page.html:<title>, <link rel='canonical'>, <meta property='og:url'>, header logo, footer copyright)

medium

malicious redirect

Tier 1 scan detected 1 redirect on era-intro.hydr0.org. The page canonical and all og: metadata redirect/attribute content to mp3.cc while the actual serving domain is hydr0.org. This redirect chain obscures the true domain from users and may be used to intercept traffic intended for MP3.cc. (location: metadata.json: redirects=1; page.html: canonical href and og:url pointing to mp3.cc)

medium

obfuscated code

All 21 media playback URLs are routed through fine.sunproxy.net using long base64-encoded path tokens (e.g., YVlGMWFTTXN3M0VjVThHdEhvZHd2aEUvN0prK0gv...). These opaque tokens obfuscate the true media source and proxy destination, consistent with the 12 suspicious base64 blobs flagged in Tier 2. Decoded content is binary/encrypted and not human-readable, preventing inspection of the actual media endpoints. (location: page.html: all data-url attributes on playlist-play anchors (lines 228, 247, 266, 285, 304, 323, 342, 361, 380, 399, 418, 437, 456, 475, 494, 513, 532, 551, 570, 589, 608))

low

hidden content

The page sets <meta name='robots' content='noarchive'>, preventing search engines and web archives from caching the page. This is used in combination with the brand impersonation to avoid archival scrutiny and make it harder to track the mirror site's history or report abuse. All HTML comments in page-hidden.txt are benign structural comments with no injected content. (location: page.html:8 - <meta name='robots' content='noarchive'>)

low

social engineering

The page includes a prominently placed sidebar link to looz.net labeled 'Online Radio' with a special CSS class 'z__important', visually elevating it among genre navigation links. This cross-promotes an unrelated external domain (looz.net) to users who believe they are on MP3.cc, potentially redirecting music-seeking traffic to a third-party site. This is one of the 2 deceptive links flagged by Tier 2. (location: page.html:204 - <a href='https://looz.net/' class='z__important no-ajax' target='_blank'>Online Radio</a>)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/era-intro.hydr0.org

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is era-intro.hydr0.org safe for AI agents to use?

era-intro.hydr0.org currently scores 51/100 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 26, 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.