context safety score
A score of 37/100 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
cloaking
Page checks user-agent for bot/crawler strings to serve different content
cloaking
Page conditionally redirects based on referrer or user-agent
cloaking
Page loads content in transparent or zero-size iframe overlay
js obfuscation
JavaScript uses Function constructor for runtime code generation
malicious redirect
A third-party script is loaded from 'pahtfi.tech' (//pahtfi.tech/c/Krstarica.js), a low-reputation .tech domain with no clear ownership or CDN affiliation. The domain is also DNS-prefetched alongside 'palibzh.tech'. Both domains follow a pattern of randomized, low-trust domain names commonly used for malvertising, traffic redirection, or payload delivery. The script is loaded deferred with no subresource integrity (SRI) check, allowing the remote host to inject arbitrary JavaScript into the page. (location: page.html:279 (script src) and page.html:11-12 (dns-prefetch))
hidden content
The page uses CSS classes such as '.ai-list-data', '.ai-ip-data', '.ai-filter-check', '.ai-fallback', '.ai-list-block' with styles 'visibility: hidden; position: absolute; width: 50%; height: 1px; top: -1000px; z-index: -9999' — elements rendered off-screen and invisible to users. While this is part of the Ad Inserter plugin's ad-management logic, the pattern of off-screen hidden elements can be used to conceal content from human visitors while still being processed by automated agents or crawlers. (location: page.html:338)
obfuscated code
The page contains custom base64 encode/decode functions (b2a, a2b, b64e, b64d) embedded inline in the page body, used extensively by the Ad Inserter plugin to store and execute ad code blocks. These functions decode and inject content via 'createContextualFragment', meaning arbitrary HTML/JS can be injected at runtime from base64-encoded strings stored in data attributes (e.g., data-code, data-ai). This pattern is a common vector for concealing malicious payloads from static analysis. (location: page-text.txt:1227-1229 and page.html (Ad Inserter JS block))
malicious redirect
The 'adxbid.info' domain is DNS-prefetched and used as an ad bidding endpoint via a dynamically constructed script URL: 'https://adxbid.info/krstarica[Homepage|Article].js'. This domain is not a recognized major ad network and the dynamic script construction based on path could be exploited to serve different payloads depending on the visited page. No SRI is present. (location: page.html:8 (dns-prefetch) and page.html:119 (dynamic script injection))
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/krstarica.comCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
krstarica.com currently scores 37/100 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.