Is polygon-rpc.com safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
44/100

context safety score

A score of 44/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
80
behavior
80
content
20
graph
30

5 threat patterns detected

high

phishing

1 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host

high

brand impersonation

The domain polygon-rpc.com uses Polygon's brand name, logo (from chainlist.onerpc.com/assets/blockchains/polygon.svg), and styling to imply official Polygon network affiliation. The site is actually operated by Ankr (third-party), disclosed only in the footer as 'Made with ♥ by Ankr'. Users and AI agents querying Polygon RPC endpoints may mistake this for the official Polygon-operated RPC. (location: page.html: <title>, og:title, twitter:title, page header — 'Polygon RPC Endpoint: Fastest, free-est, and most reliable RPC endpoint')

medium

social engineering

The page displays 'Action Required! This free RPC endpoint will stop working on Feb 16, 2026.' combined with 'Public access has been deprecated. Sign in to start using the endpoint for free.' These urgency and scarcity tactics pressure users into creating an Ankr account, using false urgency to drive account registration at ankr.com. (location: page.html: crossLink message and Freemium endpoint section — 'Action Required! This free RPC endpoint will stop working on Feb 16, 2026')

medium

malicious redirect

The 'Sign in & copy endpoint' button on a Polygon-branded page redirects users to https://ankr.com/rpc/polygon — a different domain operated by Ankr. Users believe they are authenticating with a Polygon service but are redirected to and authenticate with a third-party platform. The displayed endpoint URL is truncated as 'https://polygo...' obscuring the full destination. (location: page.html: <a class='signInButton' href='https://ankr.com/rpc/polygon'>Sign in &amp; copy endpoint</a>)

medium

credential harvesting

The site gates RPC endpoint access behind a mandatory sign-in ('Public access has been deprecated. Sign in to start using the endpoint for free.'), funneling users into account creation at ankr.com under the pretext of a Polygon-branded service. This pattern harvests user credentials (email/OAuth) for Ankr's platform via a misleadingly branded Polygon page. (location: page.html: Freemium endpoint section — 'Public access has been deprecated. Sign in to start using the endpoint for free.')

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/polygon-rpc.com

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is polygon-rpc.com safe for AI agents to use?

polygon-rpc.com currently scores 44/100 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.