Is lab-walletconnect-modal.pages.dev safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
41/100

context safety score

A score of 41/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
96
behavior
75
content
0
graph
67

5 threat patterns detected

high

hidden instruction

high hidden content ratio detected in DOM

high

brand impersonation

The domain 'lab-walletconnect-modal.pages.dev' incorporates the 'WalletConnect' brand name in a subdomain on Cloudflare Pages (pages.dev), not the legitimate walletconnect.com domain. The subdomain structure ('lab-walletconnect-modal') mimics a WalletConnect wallet connection modal, likely to deceive users into believing they are interacting with the legitimate WalletConnect service. (location: domain: lab-walletconnect-modal.pages.dev)

high

credential harvesting

The page is a Next.js single-page application (SPA) with an empty server-rendered body (div#__next is empty). All content is loaded via deferred JavaScript bundles. A WalletConnect-themed modal page that renders its UI entirely client-side is a common pattern for crypto credential harvesting sites that prompt users to connect wallets, enter seed phrases, or private keys after JS loads. The static snapshot cannot capture the rendered malicious UI. (location: page.html: <div id='__next'></div> and deferred scripts /_next/static/chunks/pages/index-af04cd17e5b0c308.js)

medium

hidden content

The Tier 2 scan detected a hidden content ratio of 1.00, meaning 100% of page content is hidden from static analysis. The page body contains no visible rendered text whatsoever in the static HTML snapshot. While this can be normal for SPAs, combined with the brand impersonation and crypto wallet theming, this represents a significant evasion of static content scanners. (location: page.html: body content, hidden_content_ratio=1.00 from .brin-context.md)

high

phishing

The combination of WalletConnect brand impersonation on a non-official domain (pages.dev subdomain), a crypto wallet modal theme ('lab-walletconnect-modal'), and fully client-side rendered content strongly indicates a phishing site targeting cryptocurrency users. Such sites typically present a fake WalletConnect modal requesting wallet connections, seed phrases, or private keys under the guise of a legitimate wallet connection flow. (location: domain: lab-walletconnect-modal.pages.dev; page.html: Next.js SPA shell with deferred JS bundles)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/lab-walletconnect-modal.pages.dev

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is lab-walletconnect-modal.pages.dev safe for AI agents to use?

lab-walletconnect-modal.pages.dev currently scores 41/100 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.