context safety score
A score of 38/100 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
malicious redirect
script/meta redirect patterns detected in page source
social engineering
The site presents itself as a generic blog ('Info'/'infoaldia.blog') but the footer injects a full-screen video player overlay with adult-content lure buttons labeled 'Fotos y Videos +18' and '95 Mujeres en linea atractivas y cachond@s', designed to deceive users into clicking links under false pretenses. (location: page.html:529-541, footer .safe-zone)
malicious redirect
JavaScript in the footer intercepts the browser back-button (history.pushState + window.onpopstate) and redirects to a configurable URL, trapping users on the page and preventing normal navigation escape. (location: page.html:638-644)
malicious redirect
After a user clicks the play button, the script immediately redirects the original tab via 'window.location.href = anuncioURL' and also wires the WhatsApp and Telegram social buttons to redirect to 'https://tuinformaciondiaria26.blogspot.com/' — an external third-party site unrelated to the blog's stated purpose. (location: page.html:630-635, page-text.txt:461-465)
malicious redirect
The dynamically generated video player page contains a script that auto-redirects to 'anuncioURL' when the video ends ('videoFinal' ended event), silently sending the user to an advertiser URL after video consumption. (location: page.html:609-613)
hidden content
Video source URLs are stored in a hidden, non-rendered div element ('#videoData' with 'data-src' attribute) rather than being placed in visible page content. This conceals the actual external video CDN links (cdn.videy.co) from casual inspection and from users. (location: page.html:212, 223, 234, 245, 256, 267, 278, 289, 300, 311)
hidden content
The footer injects a full-screen fixed-position overlay (#player-wrap, z-index:2147483646) and a safe-zone bar (z-index:2147483655) that visually covers the entire page, hiding the actual blog content from users. The real page content becomes inaccessible behind this overlay. (location: page.html:341-527)
brand impersonation
Social sharing buttons are styled with official WhatsApp and Telegram brand colors and labeled as those platforms, but both buttons redirect to 'https://tuinformaciondiaria26.blogspot.com/' — an unrelated third-party site. This impersonates WhatsApp/Telegram to manipulate click behavior. (location: page.html:531-538, page.html:634-635)
social engineering
Post slugs use '.mp4' file extensions (e.g. /1136.mp4, /1134.mp4) to make WordPress blog post URLs appear to be direct video file links, deceiving users and crawlers about the nature of the content. (location: page.html:206-316, JSON-LD schema at line 135)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/infoaldia.blogCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
infoaldia.blog 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.