context safety score
A score of 35/100 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
brand impersonation
The domain goldbett.org (note extra 't') impersonates the legitimate Italian gambling brand GoldBet (goldbet.it). The site uses the GoldBet name, logo, branding, and casino content while admitting in its own footer: 'Il sito goldbett.org non è collegato al marchio' (this site is not affiliated with the brand). This is a typosquat/lookalike domain designed to deceive users searching for the real GoldBet. (location: domain: goldbett.org; page title; footer disclaimer at page.html:395)
malicious redirect
All primary call-to-action buttons use a Base64-obfuscated redirect URL stored in a custom data attribute 'data-trrrfrwo'. The obfuscated value '/out/aHR0cHM6Ly90cmFmLWh1Yi5jb20vY2I0Z2w5ay5waHA_a2V5PXhrdXN3dmFqcmFoamUzeXIxbzBp' decodes to 'https://traf-hub.com/cb4gl9k.php?key=xkuswvajrahje3yr1o0i' — a third-party traffic hub redirect with a tracking key, routing users away from the displayed domain to an unknown affiliate/scam destination. (location: page.html:122 and page.html:287 and page.html:314 — data-trrrfrwo attribute on anchor elements)
phishing
The site mimics a legitimate gambling platform (GoldBet) to collect user registrations including full name, date of birth, email address, proof of residence, and government-issued identity documents. Users are explicitly instructed to provide these sensitive credentials, but the site is not the real GoldBet and has no legitimate claim to this data. The collected PII and identity documents would be harvested by the site operators. (location: page.html:293; page-text.txt:176)
credential harvesting
The site solicits account registration (username, email, password) and financial credentials (payment method selection including Visa, Mastercard, crypto wallets) under the false pretense of being affiliated with GoldBet casino. The footer explicitly states the site does not process payments, yet the content instructs users to deposit money and link payment accounts. (location: page.html:291-292; page-text.txt:174-175; footer disclaimer at page.html:395)
social engineering
The site uses urgency and trust-building tactics: a 30-day account completion window implying risk of account suspension, claims of SSL security and firewall protection, display of BeGambleAware and DMCA logos to appear legitimate, and prominent 'Play Now' CTAs that trigger the obfuscated redirect. These techniques pressure users into registering and depositing funds before realizing the site is fraudulent. (location: page.html:293; page.html:309; page.html:385-392; page-text.txt:176, 192)
hidden content
Link destination URLs are hidden from users via Base64 encoding in a non-standard custom HTML attribute ('data-trrrfrwo') rather than standard href values. The anchor href is set to '#' (a no-op), while the actual redirect target is concealed in the obfuscated data attribute, processed by a custom WordPress plugin script (wp-tt-second-offer-links/script.js). This obscures the true destination from users and security tools. (location: page.html:122; page.html:287; page.html:314; script at page.html:407)
obfuscated code
The redirect mechanism uses a custom data attribute with an obfuscated name ('data-trrrfrwo') containing a Base64-encoded URL. The decoding and redirect logic is offloaded to an external plugin script 'wp-content/plugins/wp-tt-second-offer-links/script.js', making the actual redirect destination non-obvious to casual inspection and bypassing naive URL-scanning tools that only examine href attributes. (location: page.html:122; page.html:407 — script src wp-tt-second-offer-links/script.js)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/goldbett.orgCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
goldbett.org currently scores 35/100 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.