context safety score
A score of 49/100 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
cloaking
Page loads content in transparent or zero-size iframe overlay
social engineering
Ad iframe from //ad.ad4989.co.kr loaded with highly permissive sandbox attributes: allow-same-origin, allow-scripts, allow-forms, allow-top-navigation, allow-popups, allow-modals, allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation, allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox. This combination (especially allow-same-origin + allow-scripts + allow-top-navigation + allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox) effectively nullifies sandbox protections, allowing the ad iframe to redirect the top frame, open unrestricted popups, and escape the sandbox entirely — a common vector for forced redirects and malvertising. (location: page.html:183, page.html:937 — <iframe src='//ad.ad4989.co.kr/cgi-bin/PelicanC.dll?impr?pageid=0GwR&out=iframe'>)
malicious redirect
Ad iframe served over protocol-relative URL (//ad.ad4989.co.kr) with sandbox flags 'allow-top-navigation' and 'allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox'. The combination allows the iframe content to navigate the parent/top window to an arbitrary URL and open popups that are not sandboxed, enabling forced navigation to phishing or malware pages. The ad server (ad.ad4989.co.kr) is a third-party with unknown reputation and is not a major ad network. (location: page.html:183, page.html:937)
social engineering
The site registers verification tokens for multiple low-reputation and adult ad networks in meta tags: Adsterra, JuicyAds, ExoClick, HilltopAds, BidVance, Propeller Ads, and AdLane. Several of these networks (Adsterra, JuicyAds, ExoClick) are known to serve aggressive/deceptive ads, forced redirects, and adult content to unsuspecting users, raising the risk of downstream social engineering via ad creatives. (location: page.html:34-43 — meta name tags for adlane, Adsterra, propeller, juicyads-site-verification, exoclick-site-verification, hilltopads-site-verification, bidvance_)
hidden content
A CSRF token value is exposed in a global JavaScript variable (window.csrf_val) in the page source. While this is a common pattern in some frameworks, exposing the CSRF token in a globally accessible JS variable allows any script on the page (including injected ad scripts) to read and exfiltrate it, potentially enabling cross-site request forgery attacks against authenticated users. (location: page.html:61 — window.csrf_val="50608446dd89249d657d4aa6f625e794")
social engineering
The sky banner links to https://ggulfile.com/?p_id=adtbest — a third-party site with unknown reputation that is not the site's own domain. The link opens in a new tab (target='_blank') and uses a tracking parameter, indicating an affiliate/ad redirect. Depending on the destination, this could lead to scam or deceptive content. (location: page.html:983 — <a href='https://ggulfile.com/?p_id=adtbest' target='_blank'>)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/ilbe.comCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
ilbe.com currently scores 49/100 with a suspicious 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.