context safety score
A score of 35/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.
encoded payload
suspicious base64-like blobs detected in page content
cloaking
Page loads content in transparent or zero-size iframe overlay
js obfuscation
JavaScript uses Function constructor for runtime code generation
prompt injection
Hidden HTML element contains AI-targeting instructions
brand impersonation
The URL being scanned is pricespider.com, but the page fully renders as 'Wayvia' (wayvia.com) with Wayvia branding, title, favicon, canonical URL, and all content. The page text explicitly states 'PriceSpider is now Wayvia.' While this appears to be a legitimate rebrand/redirect, an AI agent crawling pricespider.com would be served content entirely from a different brand identity (Wayvia), which constitutes a domain-to-brand mismatch that could mislead automated agents about what entity they are interacting with. (location: page.html:4, page.html:995 (canonical), page.html:1467 (logo link), page-text.txt:1030)
obfuscated code
Two identical obfuscated JavaScript blocks use a custom character-shifting cipher (base64-decoded strings processed with arithmetic char-code manipulation) to compute both a window property name and a script src URL at runtime, preventing static analysis from identifying the target domain or purpose. The decoded src resolves to a third-party fingerprinting/tracking script loaded dynamically. This pattern is characteristic of obfuscated data exfiltration or covert tracking loaders. (location: page.html:1022-1023, page.html:1043-1044)
hidden content
A hidden GTM noscript iframe (GTM-MLJTF7Z) is injected at the bottom of the body. This is a second Google Tag Manager container ID distinct from the primary GTM-TKNJ9RFZ used in the header, representing an undisclosed secondary tag manager deployment that could load arbitrary scripts without visibility in the primary GTM container. (location: page.html:4681)
hidden content
A script dynamically loads an external resource from 'a.usbrowserspeed.com' — a domain with no clear legitimate affiliation to Wayvia or PriceSpider. The URL includes a long hash parameter and a puid (persistent user ID), suggesting covert browser fingerprinting or user tracking by an undisclosed third party. (location: page.html:1027-1029)
hidden content
BrightFunnel tracking script is loaded from 'munchkin.brightfunnel.com' with a hardcoded session fraction (bfSession=0.041666666666666664), injecting a third-party B2B intent-data tracker. This tracker operates silently and is not disclosed in any visible privacy notice on the page. (location: page.html:1007-1018)
hidden content
A 1x1 pixel Facebook tracking image is rendered with display:none in a noscript block, enabling passive pixel tracking even when JavaScript is disabled. The pixel ID 1682220492079728 is hardcoded and sends PageView events to Facebook for all visitors. (location: page.html:4676)
curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/pricespider.comCommon questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.
pricespider.com currently scores 35/100 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.