context safety score
A score of 73/100 indicates minor risk signals were detected. The entity may be legitimate but has characteristics that warrant attention.
malicious redirect
The page contains two link tags in the <head> pointing to 'https://adumbrate.info' — an off-domain, unrelated third-party site. One is disguised as a canonical AMP link (`<link rel="amphtml" href="https://adumbrate.info">`) and another as a mobile alternate (`<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" media="only screen and (max-width: 600px)" href="https://adumbrate.info">`). These are injected redirect hooks that send AMP crawlers and mobile browsers to an unrelated external domain, a well-known technique for cloaking and traffic hijacking. (location: page.html:91 — <link rel="amphtml" href="https://adumbrate.info"> and <link rel="alternate" ... href="https://adumbrate.info">)
social engineering
The site presents fabricated first-person escort service profiles with detailed physical descriptions, urgency language, and cash-payment framing ('ödemelerin elden yapıldığını' — payments made in hand) designed to manipulate users into real-world contact and financial transactions with unknown individuals. (location: page.html:129–508, page-text.txt:30–408)
hidden content
Two suspicious base64 blobs were flagged by the Tier 2 scan. The JSON-LD schema block in the <head> is heavily encoded and contains a truncated `openingHoursSpecification` field that is cut off mid-value, potentially concealing injected structured data. The emoji loader script also contains large inline base64/encoded payloads within a `<script type="module">` block that warrant inspection for payload delivery. (location: page.html:23 (JSON-LD schema), page.html:702–end (wp-emoji module script))
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/eumamae.comCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
eumamae.com currently scores 73/100 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.
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.