Is kmspico.lc safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
39/100

context safety score

A score of 39/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
100
behavior
60
content
0
graph
80

6 threat patterns detected

high

phishing

2 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host

high

brand impersonation

Site presents itself as an official or trusted source for KMSPico, using Microsoft product names (Windows 11, Office), Microsoft KMS branding, and the button label 'OFFICIAL WEBSITE KMSPICO' to falsely imply legitimacy. Footer explicitly states 'not affiliated with Microsoft' — confirming deliberate impersonation of Microsoft-adjacent authority. (location: page title, meta description, download button label, footer disclaimer — page.html lines 1, 24, and download form)

high

social engineering

Page instructs users to disable Windows Defender and antivirus software before extracting or running the downloaded tool ('you'd better disable Windows Defender or similar antivirus software for a while'). This is a classic social engineering tactic used to allow malware to execute without detection. Additionally, the archive is password-protected (password hidden in filename or a bundled text file), a technique used to prevent automated AV scanning of the archive contents. (location: page.html — installation instructions section, surrounding the windows-defender screenshot image)

high

phishing

The site is a piracy/cracking tool distribution page masquerading as a legitimate software information site. It uses trust signals (Trustpilot widget, 'official' labeling, Microsoft documentation links, license recommendation notice pointing to microsoft.com) to create a veneer of legitimacy while delivering illegal software activation tools that are widely known vectors for malware distribution. (location: https://kmspico.lc — entire page; download form action at kmspico.lc/download-link/downloa.php)

medium

malicious redirect

Download form submits to 'https://www.kmspico.lc/download-link/downloa.php' (note the misspelling 'downloa.php' instead of 'download.php'), opening in a new tab. This obfuscated endpoint is not a direct file download but a PHP redirect handler whose final destination is unknown from the static page. The pre-scan also flagged 1 redirect, consistent with a chained redirect chain from this endpoint. (location: page.html — form element: <form action="https://www.kmspico.lc/download-link/downloa.php" target="_blank" method="get" id="download-kmspico">)

low

hidden content

12 base64-encoded data URIs detected. The majority are 1x1 GIF lazy-load placeholders () used as image placeholders throughout the page, contributing to the 0.07 hidden content ratio. While these specific blobs are benign lazy-load patterns, their volume across all images is consistent with content being deferred/hidden from initial render. All inline JavaScript base64 blobs decoded to legitimate WordPress/theme functionality. (location: page.html — multiple img tags with src='data:image/gif;base64,...' throughout content)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/kmspico.lc

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is kmspico.lc safe for AI agents to use?

kmspico.lc currently scores 39/100 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 8, 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.