context safety score
A score of 32/100 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
social engineering
Site explicitly advertises 'fappening' leaked content and 'OnlyFans leaks', which are non-consensual intimate image (NCII) distributions. The homepage prominently markets stolen/leaked private images of real named celebrities as a core value proposition, exploiting victims for traffic. (location: page.html:1 (title, meta keywords), page-text.txt:162 (sidebar description))
brand impersonation
The site brands itself 'CelebGate' and uses the subdomain celeb.gate.cc, closely mimicking the cultural reference to 'The Fappening' / 'Celebgate' leak scandal to lend false authenticity and attract users searching for that event. The site title includes 'Celebgate' and the og:site_name is 'celeb.gate.cc'. (location: page.html:1 (meta description: 'Watch your favorit playboy pics on Celebgate'), page.html:161 (sidebar widget title 'celeb.gate.cc'))
malicious redirect
A hidden 1x1 pixel iframe embeds a third-party ad/redirect network URL (go.xxxjmp.com) with tracking parameters, capable of silently loading malicious content, drive-by downloads, or redirecting users without consent. The iframe is styled with border:none and positioned inside a sidebar widget. (location: page.html:163 (iframe src='https://go.xxxjmp.com/smartpop/afa0924473ebc416215708dd4bc227b42d64c58d8c03749e916500cdf4e5a7f6?userId=...'))
hidden content
A 1x1 invisible iframe (height=1, width=1, position:absolute, top:0, left:0, border:none, visibility:hidden) is injected into the page body by an obfuscated inline script. This Cloudflare challenge script creates a hidden frame and dynamically injects further scripts inside it, a common technique for evading content scanners and loading secondary payloads. (location: page.html:177 (inline script at bottom of body: hidden iframe creation with document.createElement('iframe'), a.height=1, a.width=1, a.style.visibility='hidden'))
obfuscated code
An inline IIFE (immediately invoked function expression) at the end of the page dynamically creates a hidden iframe, then injects a script tag inside it with an encoded parameter (t:'MTc3MjY0NDI5NA==', which is base64). This obfuscation pattern is used to bypass static analysis and load challenge or tracking scripts indirectly. (location: page.html:177 (inline script: window.__CF$cv$params={r:'9d72803868b1c176',t:'MTc3MjY0NDI5NA=='}, dynamic script injection inside hidden iframe))
social engineering
Partner links in the sidebar use tracking/redirect URLs through go.strpjmp.com (a known ad-jump/smartpop network) with long opaque token parameters, disguised as benign 'Partner' links labeled 'Celebs Live'. These smartpop links are commonly used for forced redirects and unwanted pop-under/pop-over ads. (location: page.html:163 (Partner widget: href='https://go.strpjmp.com/smartpop/f5182b5509142b2acefea57437bc502686d535b18ecbb98c8f680c1c222b23cc?userId=...'))
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/gate.ccCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
gate.cc currently scores 32/100 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.