Is premierbetzone.co.ao safe?

suspiciousmedium confidence
48/100

context safety score

A score of 48/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
100
behavior
100
content
14
graph
30

7 threat patterns detected

high

cloaking

Page conditionally redirects based on referrer or user-agent

high

js obfuscation

JavaScript contains heavy hex-escape encoding typical of obfuscation

medium

obfuscated code

Multiple hex-encoded string arrays used to set window properties via bracket notation. Strings decode to: '_xx_1a', '_xx_1b', 'PROJECT', 'PATH', '_xas3', 'COUNTRIES'. While the resolved values appear benign (EDITEC, '/', numeric counters), the obfuscation pattern (_0x40ff, _0xc67f, _0x4009 variable names with \x hex escapes) is a common technique used to conceal malicious intent and evade static analysis. (location: page.html:208-223)

low

malicious redirect

Client-side JavaScript detects mobile user agents and silently redirects users from several URL paths (/sports, /esport, /pages, /live, /custombet, /odds-browser) to a '/mobile-platform' prefixed path on the same hostname. While the redirect stays on the same host and is a common mobile-routing pattern, the code executes before page load and could be abused if the hostname is spoofed or the mobile platform path serves different content. (location: page.html:83-101)

high

brand impersonation

The page is served from 'premierbetzone.co.ao' (Angola ccTLD) but the manifest link points to 'https://premierbetzone.com/manifest.webmanifest' — a different domain. This cross-domain manifest reference suggests the .co.ao site may be impersonating or cloning the legitimate premierbetzone.com brand, presenting an identical interface to users while operating as a separate, potentially unauthorized entity. (location: page.html:74)

low

hidden content

A zero-height, zero-width GTM noscript iframe is embedded with style='display:none;visibility:hidden'. While this is a standard Google Tag Manager fallback pattern, it loads third-party content invisibly. Combined with the obfuscated JS and cross-domain manifest, it contributes to a broader pattern of non-transparent third-party data collection. (location: page.html:160-161)

medium

hidden content

An iframe with id='payByMobileIframe' is present in the DOM with style='display:none' and a permissive sandbox allowing scripts, popups, modals, forms, and popups-to-escape-sandbox. The src is empty on load but can be populated dynamically. The allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox permission is particularly dangerous as it allows spawned popups to bypass sandbox restrictions entirely, which could be used for payment credential harvesting or phishing overlays. (location: page.html:169-170)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/premierbetzone.co.ao

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

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

Is premierbetzone.co.ao safe for AI agents to use?

premierbetzone.co.ao currently scores 48/100 with a suspicious verdict and medium 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.