context safety score
A score of 35/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.
tls connection failed
Could not establish TLS connection
brand impersonation
The domain 'microsoftinternetsafety.net' impersonates Microsoft by incorporating the brand name 'microsoft' into a non-Microsoft TLD (.net), combined with authoritative-sounding terms ('internetsafety') to deceive users into trusting the site as an official Microsoft property. (location: domain: microsoftinternetsafety.net)
phishing
The domain pattern 'microsoftinternetsafety.net' is consistent with phishing infrastructure: it uses a well-known brand name (Microsoft) combined with trust-inducing language ('internet safety') on a non-official TLD. TLS is not connected and the certificate is invalid, indicating the site may be newly stood up or intentionally avoiding certificate scrutiny typical of phishing lure pages. (location: domain: microsoftinternetsafety.net, tls.connected=false, tls.cert_valid=false)
credential harvesting
Domains combining a major brand name with safety/security terminology ('microsoftinternetsafety.net') are a well-documented pattern used to lure victims into entering Microsoft account credentials under the pretense of a security warning or identity verification flow. The absence of valid TLS and empty page content (possibly cloaked or served conditionally) further elevates this risk. (location: domain: microsoftinternetsafety.net)
social engineering
The domain name itself constitutes a social engineering vector: the phrase 'internet safety' implies authority and urgency, which are classic social engineering triggers designed to lower victim skepticism and encourage compliance (e.g., entering credentials, clicking links, or following instructions). (location: domain: microsoftinternetsafety.net)
hidden content
The page HTML and visible text are both completely empty despite the domain being reachable enough to have metadata collected. This is consistent with cloaking behavior — serving empty or benign content to automated scanners while delivering malicious content to targeted human visitors based on user-agent, referrer, or geolocation filtering. (location: page.html (empty), page-text.txt (empty), page-hidden.txt (empty))
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/microsoftinternetsafety.netCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
microsoftinternetsafety.net currently scores 35/100 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.