context safety score
A score of 39/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.
hidden instruction
high hidden content ratio detected in DOM
encoded payload
suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content
js obfuscation
JavaScript uses Function constructor for runtime code generation
brand impersonation
Domain 'my99exch.black' uses a '.black' TLD combined with the '99exch' name, impersonating or mimicking a known betting/exchange platform (e.g., '99exch' or similar gambling exchange brands). The use of an unconventional TLD combined with a brand-like name is a common brand impersonation pattern for fraudulent gambling or financial exchange sites. (location: metadata.json: domain field; https://my99exch.black)
hidden content
Commented-out IP harvesting code found in the HTML: a script using 'https://api.ipify.org?format=jsonp&callback=getIP' with a function that calls 'document.write' to expose the user's public IP address. Although currently commented out, its presence suggests prior or potential future activation for user IP collection without consent. (location: page.html lines 22-28; page-hidden.txt lines 7-13)
hidden content
Commented-out Facebook Meta Pixel tracking code (Pixel ID: 1949390595505532) found in the HTML. While Meta Pixel itself is a legitimate analytics tool, its presence in a commented-out state on a suspicious gambling impersonation site suggests it may have been used or is intended for covert user behavioral tracking and retargeting without user disclosure. (location: page.html lines 30-44; page-hidden.txt lines 14-30)
social engineering
The page renders virtually no visible text content (page-text.txt is essentially blank) despite loading multiple JavaScript bundles including a main Angular/SPA bundle, socket.io, custom JS files, and a protobuf library. This pattern — a near-empty static shell with all content delivered dynamically — is used to evade static analysis and serve different content to different visitors (e.g., bots vs. real users), a classic cloaking/social engineering delivery mechanism. (location: page-text.txt (entire file); page.html lines 49-64)
credential harvesting
The site loads socket.io (real-time bidirectional communication), protobuf (binary serialization), and multiple custom JS files (customjs.js, custom.js, messages.js) alongside an Angular SPA. This combination — typical of online gambling/exchange platforms — facilitates real-time credential submission and account data transmission in a format that is opaque to network inspection, consistent with infrastructure designed to harvest login credentials or financial account data. (location: page.html lines 51-64: assets/js/socket.io.js, assets/js/protobuf.min.js, assets/js/custom.js, assets/js/messages.js)
phishing
The site 'my99exch.black' combines multiple high-risk signals: a suspicious '.black' TLD, a brand-impersonating domain name targeting a gambling/exchange platform, a completely blank visible page with all content in opaque JS bundles, real-time socket infrastructure, and IP-harvesting code. This profile is consistent with a phishing site targeting users of a legitimate betting exchange, designed to steal credentials and financial information under the guise of a familiar platform. (location: https://my99exch.black (entire site); metadata.json, page.html)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/my99exch.blackCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
my99exch.black currently scores 39/100 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.