context safety score
A score of 31/100 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
Domain 'msftauthimages.net' mimics Microsoft ('msft') and uses 'auth' and 'images' — terms directly associated with Microsoft authentication flows and CDN infrastructure. This is a classic typosquat/brand-impersonation pattern designed to appear as a legitimate Microsoft authentication or image-serving endpoint. (location: domain: msftauthimages.net)
phishing
The domain combines 'msft' (Microsoft abbreviation), 'auth' (authentication), and 'images' (commonly used in phishing kits to serve spoofed login page assets). The combination is a well-known pattern for hosting Microsoft credential phishing pages or phishing kit resources. (location: domain: msftauthimages.net)
credential harvesting
Domains structured as '[brand]auth[resource].tld' are frequently used to host fake login portals or serve image/script assets for credential-harvesting pages impersonating Microsoft 365, Azure, or Outlook login flows. (location: domain: msftauthimages.net)
malicious redirect
TLS connection failed (connected=false, cert_valid=false) on a domain impersonating Microsoft authentication infrastructure. This is consistent with a parked or intermittently active phishing domain that may redirect victims to a live phishing kit, or that is in a dormant/pre-deployment state. (location: metadata.json: tls block — connected=false, cert_valid=false)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/msftauthimages.netCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
msftauthimages.net currently scores 31/100 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.