Is goal7.co safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
33/100

context safety score

A score of 33/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
50
behavior
100
content
0
graph
30

8 threat patterns detected

medium

encoded payload

suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content

high

cloaking

Page conditionally redirects based on referrer or user-agent

high

brand impersonation

The site operates at goal7.co but consistently presents itself as 'Goal.co' and 'goal.co' throughout the page title, OG tags (og:url set to https://goal.co/, og:site_name set to goal.co), footer copyright, and body text. This impersonates the legitimate goal.co sports brand by using a typosquat domain (goal7.co) while displaying all branding of the original. (location: page.html lines 17-20, 23, 665-666; og:url meta tag)

medium

hidden content

Both page.html and page-text.txt contain extremely long runs of whitespace characters (hundreds of blank spaces) on lines 42, 150, and 913 in the HTML, and lines 96 and 845 in the page-text. These whitespace padding blocks are a known technique to push content out of normal viewport rendering or to obscure content from casual inspection while keeping it present in the DOM. (location: page.html lines 42, 150, 913; page-text.txt lines 96, 845)

medium

hidden content

All ad-block elements are styled with 'display: none' as the default CSS rule, with JavaScript conditionally revealing them only on mobile devices (ena=2). This means ad content — including gambling/betting affiliate links via ibit.ly URL shortener — is hidden from desktop crawlers and security scanners but shown to mobile users. (location: page.html lines 46-53, 57-64, 126-149)

high

social engineering

Multiple banner advertisements link to gambling/betting sites (ufazeed, ufagool, ufac4, sexygame66, slotgame66, lotto432) via the ibit.ly URL shortener, which obfuscates the true destination. These are embedded on a sports scores site targeting Thai users, using a trusted sports context to promote unregulated gambling services. The alt text on some banners contains garbled characters ('????????????????? lotto432', '????????????? UFABET') suggesting encoding manipulation to evade text-based filters. (location: page.html lines 71, 92-101, 534-535)

medium

malicious redirect

All gambling advertisement links use the ibit.ly URL shortener (e.g., https://ibit.ly/ufazeed, https://ibit.ly/ufagool, https://ibit.ly/ufac4, https://ibit.ly/sexygame66, https://ibit.ly/slotgame66, https://ibit.ly/lotto432) which masks the true destination URLs. URL shorteners in ad contexts are used to redirect users to destinations that would be blocked if linked directly. (location: page.html lines 71, 92, 95, 98, 101, 534)

low

hidden content

Ad banner alt text contains sequences of '?' characters ('????????????????? lotto432', '????????????? UFABET ????????????? 1', '???????????????? slotgame6666') consistent with charset encoding obfuscation. The original Thai text has been mangled, possibly deliberately to bypass keyword-based content filters while retaining human-readable images. (location: page.html lines 95, 98, 535)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/goal7.co

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is goal7.co safe for AI agents to use?

goal7.co currently scores 33/100 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.

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.