Is jeudiunjour.web.app safe?

suspiciousmedium confidence
47/100

context safety score

A score of 47/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
100
behavior
100
content
0
graph
68

6 threat patterns detected

critical

malicious redirect

Meta refresh tag performs an immediate (0-second) redirect to 'http://pousserfortauth.monster', a suspicious domain with 'auth' in the name hosted on a .monster TLD, strongly indicative of a credential harvesting or phishing destination. (location: page.html:5 - <meta http-equiv="refresh" content="0; url=http://pousserfortauth.monster">)

critical

malicious redirect

JavaScript window.location.href redirect to 'https://reumebrebe.bremetheres.top/?pwd=ingde' on a suspicious .top TLD subdomain. The query parameter 'pwd=ingde' suggests password or credential passing as part of a phishing or credential harvesting flow. (location: page.html:7 - window.location.href = "https://reumebrebe.bremetheres.top/?pwd=ingde")

critical

credential harvesting

The redirect destination 'pousserfortauth.monster' contains 'auth' in the domain name, strongly suggesting it is designed to harvest authentication credentials. Combined with the immediate redirect mechanism, this is a classic credential harvesting setup. (location: page.html:5 - meta refresh redirect to pousserfortauth.monster)

high

credential harvesting

Redirect URL 'https://reumebrebe.bremetheres.top/?pwd=ingde' includes a 'pwd' query parameter, which may be used to pre-populate or exfiltrate password/credential data as part of a phishing chain. (location: page.html:7 - JavaScript redirect with ?pwd=ingde parameter)

critical

phishing

The page is a redirect-only page with no legitimate content, using dual redirect mechanisms (meta refresh + JavaScript) to funnel victims to suspicious external domains. This is a classic phishing trampoline page designed to obscure the true destination and evade blocklists. (location: page.html - entire page structure)

medium

hidden content

The visible page text only shows a fallback 'link to example' pointing to example.com, completely masking the actual redirect destinations from the user. The true malicious destinations are hidden in the meta tag and JavaScript, not visible in the rendered page text. (location: page.html:5,7,13 - redirect targets concealed from visible page content)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/jeudiunjour.web.app

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is jeudiunjour.web.app safe for AI agents to use?

jeudiunjour.web.app currently scores 47/100 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.

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 6, 2026

Verdict Scale

safe80–100
caution50–79
suspicious20–49
dangerous0–19

Trust Graph

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.