context safety score
A score of 38/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.
js obfuscation
JavaScript contains heavy hex-escape encoding typical of obfuscation
brand impersonation
The site in3x.net impersonates XNXX (a well-known adult content brand). The meta description explicitly references 'XNXX', the configuration object sets sitename to 'xnxx', external assets are loaded from 'xnxx-cdn.com', and the site replicates XNXX's UI and content structure while operating under a different domain (in3x.net). (location: page.html:4,9,20 — title, meta description, xv.conf sitename)
obfuscated code
A hex-encoded JavaScript block uses an array of hex-escaped strings (_0x6156) to obfuscate its logic. Decoded, it constructs a hostname-derived string and injects a hidden 0x0 pixel <img> tag pointing to //whos.amung.us/swidget/<computed>.png — a covert user-tracking beacon that fingerprints visitors without disclosure. (location: page.html:110 — var _0x6156=["\x38\x78",...])
hidden content
A 1x1 invisible iframe is injected via JavaScript (height=1, width=1, position:absolute, visibility:hidden) to silently load and execute Cloudflare challenge scripts (cdn-cgi/challenge-platform). While potentially legitimate, it is rendered invisible to users and executes arbitrary injected script inside the iframe document, constituting hidden code execution. (location: page.html:110 — anonymous IIFE creating hidden iframe)
hidden content
A 0x0 pixel tracking image is dynamically written to the page via obfuscated JS, pointing to //whos.amung.us/swidget/<hostname-derived-id>.png with width=0px height=0px border=0. This is an invisible user-tracking beacon not disclosed to users. (location: page.html:110 — document.write(_0x6156[11]+whos3+_0x6156[12]))
malicious redirect
Two third-party ad scripts are loaded from 'brittlesturdyunlovable.com' and 'chaseherbalpasty.com' — domains with randomly-generated, suspicious names typical of malvertising networks. These scripts are injected via document.write and dynamically select from multiple ad zones, and can serve drive-by redirects, popunders, or malware to visitors. (location: page.html:77-82 — adu250/adu2250/adu3250 referencing chaseherbalpasty.com; adu100 referencing brittlesturdyunlovable.com)
malicious redirect
Scripts loaded from 'cdnaz.win/site.js' and 'cdnaz.win/pop.js' are third-party assets from a domain (cdnaz.win) associated with popunder/redirect ad networks. The 'pop.js' filename is a strong indicator of popunder redirect functionality that sends users to unwanted or malicious destinations without user consent. (location: page.html:101,106 — <script src="https://cdnaz.win/site.js"> and //cdnaz.win/pop.js)
social engineering
The site's meta description and title text falsely claim to be XNXX and advertise '1 crore+ free sex videos', using authoritative brand association and volume claims to entice users into clicking and engaging with a site that serves aggressive ad networks and tracking. (location: page.html:4,9 — <title> and <meta name="description">)
hidden content
Multiple UI elements are forcibly hidden via CSS with 'display:none !important' including login forms, cookie alerts, ad containers, video metadata, messaging, and header icons. This suppresses standard browser UI protections and consent notices, preventing users from seeing cookie/privacy alerts or account-related security prompts. (location: page.html:22 — inline <style> block hiding #cookies-use-alert, #signin-popup-form, .video-metadata, #x-messages among others)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/in3x.netCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
in3x.net currently scores 38/100 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.