Is inflowwapi.com safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
42/100

context safety score

A score of 42/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
35
behavior
100
content
30
graph
30

6 threat patterns detected

high

tls connection failed

Could not establish TLS connection

medium

phishing

Domain 'inflowwapi.com' uses a doubled letter ('ww') in what appears to be an 'inflow api' brand name, a classic typosquatting/homoglyph technique used to impersonate legitimate API or SaaS services and deceive users or automated agents into trusting the domain. (location: metadata.json: domain field)

medium

brand impersonation

The domain 'inflowwapi.com' mimics a legitimate 'inflow API' or similar branded API service via character duplication ('infloww' vs 'inflow'), a common brand impersonation pattern used to intercept API traffic or credentials from developers and AI agents. (location: metadata.json: domain field)

high

malicious redirect

TLS connection failed (connected=false, cert_valid=false, san_match=false) yet the URL uses the https:// scheme. This misconfiguration or intentional TLS failure may be used to downgrade connections, perform MITM attacks, or redirect traffic insecurely. Legitimate API endpoints do not fail TLS validation. (location: metadata.json: tls object)

high

credential harvesting

The combination of an API-themed domain name ('inflowwapi.com'), failed TLS (no valid certificate), and completely empty page content is consistent with a credential harvesting or API key interception endpoint — designed to silently accept and log credentials or tokens submitted by clients without serving any legitimate content. (location: metadata.json and page.html (empty))

medium

hidden content

The page returns no visible content (page-text.txt empty), no HTML (page.html empty), and no hidden elements (page-hidden.txt empty), while the domain is actively registered and resolves. A deliberately blank but reachable endpoint is a common technique to avoid automated content scanners while still functioning as a data collection or redirect backend. (location: page.html, page-text.txt, page-hidden.txt (all empty))

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/inflowwapi.com

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is inflowwapi.com safe for AI agents to use?

inflowwapi.com currently scores 42/100 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.