Is moneycare.su 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
90
behavior
100
content
0
graph
30

11 threat patterns detected

medium

cloaking

Page checks user-agent for bot/crawler strings to serve different content

high

cloaking

Page conditionally redirects based on referrer or user-agent

high

cloaking

Page loads content in transparent or zero-size iframe overlay

high

malicious redirect

The canonical URL points to 'https://bygift.ru/mc' while the page is served from 'moneycare.su'. This cross-domain canonical tag is a deceptive SEO redirect signal, potentially used to associate a different domain's authority with this page or to mislead crawlers and agents about the true origin of content. (location: page.html:7 - <link rel='canonical' href='https://bygift.ru/mc'>)

high

hidden content

A VK retargeting pixel image is loaded with 'position:fixed; left:-999px;' — intentionally hidden off-screen. This silently tracks visitors without visible disclosure. (location: page.html:737 and page-text.txt:605 - <img src='https://vk.com/rtrg?p=VK-RTRG-436251-bZkCj' style='position:fixed; left:-999px;'>)

medium

hidden content

A Yandex Metrika watch beacon image is loaded with 'position:absolute; left:-9999px;' — hidden off-screen tracking pixel used to silently profile visitors. (location: page-text.txt:605 - <img src='https://mc.yandex.ru/watch/55972396' style='position:absolute; left:-9999px;'>)

medium

hidden content

A commented-out block within active HTML contains a hidden iframe loading content from 'https://worm.moneycare.su/1/' — a suspicious subdomain named 'worm'. Although wrapped in an HTML comment block, the surrounding code structure suggests it may have been active or could be conditionally rendered. The subdomain name 'worm' is anomalous for a legitimate credit platform. (location: page.html:691 - <iframe allowtransparency src='https://worm.moneycare.su/1/' width='100%' height='440'>)

medium

social engineering

The page collects personal information including full name, phone number (required), and city via a Bitrix24 CRM form embedded from 'https://moneycare.bitrix24.ru'. The .su TLD (Soviet Union) is commonly associated with higher-risk domains and less regulated registrations, increasing the risk profile of this data collection. (location: page.html:461 - b24form({"id":"3","lang":"ru","sec":"ha2l21","type":"inline"}) and page.html:486-487)

low

social engineering

The page uses aggressive urgency and high-approval-rate claims ('До 96% процентов одобрения', '15 решений за 2 минуты') typical of predatory lending social engineering designed to pressure users into submitting personal and financial data quickly. (location: page.html:246, page.html:277 - text content throughout page)

low

malicious redirect

An external affiliate link redirects users to mtsbank.ru with UTM tracking parameters identifying moneycare as the traffic source ('utm_source=partner&utm_medium=moneycare&utm_campaign=momentum'). While potentially legitimate, the tracking chain through a .su domain to a major bank warrants scrutiny for credential harvesting in the redirect chain. (location: page.html:745 - href='https://www.mtsbank.ru/chastnim-licam/krediti/credit-on-line/?utm_source=partner&utm_medium=moneycare&utm_campaign=momentum')

low

hidden content

Bot/crawler detection script actively checks navigator.userAgent for bots (Google, Yandex, Baidu, Facebook, etc.) and applies different rendering behavior for human vs. bot visitors — a classic cloaking technique used to show different content to crawlers versus real users. (location: page.html:35 - if((/bot|google|yandex|baidu|bing|msn|duckduckbot|teoma|slurp|crawler|spider|robot|crawling|facebook/i.test(navigator.userAgent))===false ...))

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/moneycare.su

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is moneycare.su safe for AI agents to use?

moneycare.su 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 4, 2026

Verdict Scale

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

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.