context safety score
A score of 43/100 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
malicious redirect
JavaScript embedded in the page <head> immediately redirects all visitors to an external URL at 'auc.bqv.mybluehost.me' — a suspicious third-party host unrelated to the blogspot domain. The redirect uses window.location.href and executes unconditionally on page load, sending URL hash fragments (ref, date, courriel/email) as query parameters to the destination. This is a classic phishing redirect chain that harvests parameters passed in the URL hash. (location: page.html:26-33, <script> block in <head>)
credential harvesting
The redirect URL includes query parameters named 'courriel' (French for 'email'), 'ref', and 'date' extracted directly from the page's URL hash fragment (window.location.hash). This pattern is used to pass victim-specific data (such as a pre-filled email address) to a phishing landing page, enabling targeted credential harvesting at the destination 'auc.bqv.mybluehost.me/website_90a8ee5d/wp-content/css/12//?op=1'. (location: page.html:29, redirect URL construction with hash[0], hash[1], hash[2])
phishing
The destination URL 'auc.bqv.mybluehost.me/website_90a8ee5d/wp-content/css/12//?op=1' is structured to disguise a phishing page as a CSS asset path under a WordPress installation on a shared hosting provider. The path '/wp-content/css/12//' with '?op=1' is a known phishing kit deployment pattern. The blog itself has no visible content ('Aucun article'), serving solely as a redirect vehicle. (location: page.html:29, randURLs array)
hidden content
The page body is entirely empty of visible content (no posts, no text, no UI elements — confirmed by page-text.txt showing only whitespace and injected JS). The sole purpose of the page is to silently execute the redirect script. The malicious script is placed in the <head> before any content renders, ensuring the redirect fires before a user can read anything or a security tool can observe meaningful content. (location: page.html:39-42, page-text.txt:1-12)
social engineering
The page abuses Google's trusted Blogger/blogspot.com platform (legitimate TLS cert issued by Google Trust Services, valid HTTPS, non-blocklisted domain) to lend credibility and evade automated reputation checks. The domain name 'jefgoakjaaa' is random/nonsensical, consistent with a throwaway account created purely to host a redirect page while inheriting blogspot.com's trusted reputation. (location: metadata.json, page.html:2-14)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/jefgoakjaaa.blogspot.comCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
jefgoakjaaa.blogspot.com currently scores 43/100 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.